Is the City's Population about to Grow?

Today, the Census Bureau released their estimate of the population of cities as of July 1, 2018. Their estimate for
Detroit:
2018 672,662
2017 674,188

These are estimated but it appears that the population is stabalizing. The decrease from 2017 to 2018 was only 1,526 or 0.2 percent. There is no evidence here that the city's population is growing but annual losses are getting smaller and smaller.

The City of Detroit now has a very active Complete Count committee for 2020. Let's hope that the Supremes decide
that the additional of a citizenship question on next year's enumeration is unconstitutional.

We'll see...

Will they count the people living downtown, but keeping their parents' address?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by renf

Let's hope that the Supremes decide that the additional of a citizenship question on next year's enumeration is unconstitutional.

---

Why? I have no problem with that question. It won't [[or shouldn't) affect the overall count in any way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meddle

Why? I have no problem with that question. It won't [[or shouldn't) affect the overall count in any way.

---

It shouldn't, but you know it will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EGrant

Will they count the people living downtown, but keeping their parents' address?

---

I wish there was a count on that. I'd wager it's over 20K. I'd guess it is not just downtown either but for the entire city due to the insurance redlining.

Another factor that may be coming close to running its course is the foreclosure bubble. Detroit and Wayne County had neglected that for long but has been sternly cracking down for the last 3-4 years resulting in thousands of evictions and displacements.

That has to have contributed to populations outflow. I wonder if there is any study on that?

Don't worry 313WX I'm sure you'll find a way to shit on that too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seven&wyo

Don't worry 313WX I'm sure you'll find a way to shit on that too

---

And +/- O3H?

I'm guessing we are probably pretty close to the point where inflows/births balance out outflows/deaths, but I don't trust the mid-decade Census numbers so even if the 2020 number turns out to be higher than the 2018 number I won't be convinced there has been an actual increase. But I think it is entirely possible the numbers will come out that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EGrant

Will they count the people living downtown, but keeping their parents' address?

---

You are exactly correct, that is the elephant in the room that has been in Detroit for years. Very seldom do they like to mention this in the newspapers either, there are thousands of people that are living in Detroit that do not use Detroit as their principal residence, many do have a principal residence somewhere else whether it be in Michigan or another state and Detroit is their secondary, which is totally legal, however thousands of people living in Detroit use out of Detroit addresses even though it is the principal residence. The actual population of Detroit is easily 10 to 20,000 more than what the count is showing. It always has been.

NO! Detroit's population by 2020 Census is still declining. However it's not accelerating.

Detroit's black population is decreasing due to crime, black flight to the suburbs, better schools, housing and retail hubs.

Detroit's white population is slowly increasing due to gentrification from Gilbert town [[ Downtown Detroit), a stronger growing regional business base, new exotic restaurants and retails, boutique hotels, mega lofts and super condos.


Give it about 25 years and Detroit's population will be back up again.

I know several people who live in the city with addresses elsewhere who are planning to switch their address to Detroit if the car insurance debacle is fixed. Today's announcement is a little glimmer of hope but I'm sure the insurance companies will find some loophole to continue redlining the city.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K-slice

I know several people who live in the city with addresses elsewhere who are planning to switch their address to Detroit if the car insurance debacle is fixed. Today's announcement is a little glimmer of hope but I'm sure the insurance companies will find some loophole to continue redlining the city.

---

I don't think the blame is solely on the insurance companies. To the contrary. It's the sleazy lawyers taking advantage of the unlimited liability payouts.

I look at the housing crisis of 2008 as the reason the steep decline of population then. This decade if counted right I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers are evening out or rising.

There is one other component of the city's population growth not mentoned here. That is, a modest rise in the numbers of immigrants from the i East and Bangladesh arriving in the city, especially in Bangla Village and Warrendale. If federal policies were to change and more refugees from the violence in the Middle East were admitted, there would be more
of an increase in a few Detroit neighborhoods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bragaboutme

I look at the housing crisis of 2008 as the reason the steep decline of population then. This decade if counted right I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers are evening out or rising.

---

Detroit was losing somewhere between 12,000-15,000 people every year since the early 90s, and that was after falling below 1 million in the 1990 census for the first time since the 20s or 30s, or about 300,000 people over a 20 year span ending in the 2010 census.

Staggering.

Just as staggering was the Detroit Board of Ed which in 1985, when I graduated, had well over 140,000 students. They have been at rock bottom since about 2008 to present with around 45-50 thousand students.

To answer the OP's question, until the school district is fixed, any increase in Detroit's population will be statistically insignificant.

I'd be a fool to think Detroit's population will grow to any extent that will make a difference regionally or nationally [[context)

I hope it does

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bradley

I'd be a fool to think Detroit's population will grow to any extent that will make a difference regionally or nationally [[context)

I hope it does

---

Maybe not, but a recorded net positive in population as opposed to a negative in population I think can speak volumes.

Metro Detroit hit its peak in 1970. Metro Seattle and Minnesota could both over take Metro Detroit in the 2020 census. I've relocated to Atlanta after more than 40 years in Metro Detroit and 2 years in Bogotá Colombia. If there's any doubt about the downward spiral of Detroit, look no further than the wealth evaporation from Oakland county; once the nation's 4th wealthiest county....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colombian Dan

Metro Detroit hit its peak in 1970. Metro Seattle and Minnesota could both over take Metro Detroit in the 2020 census. I've relocated to Atlanta after more than 40 years in Metro Detroit and 2 years in Bogotá Colombia. If there's any doubt about the downward spiral of Detroit, look no further than the wealth evaporation from Oakland county; once the nation's 4th wealthiest county....

---

There's no wealth evaporation. Oakland county is richer than ever. it's just more diverse now. Also Minnesota? what are you talking about? Stay in Bogota

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny

NO! Detroit's population by 2020 Census is still declining. However it's not accelerating.

Detroit's black population is decreasing due to crime, black flight to the suburbs, better schools, housing and retail hubs.

Detroit's white population is slowly increasing due to gentrification from Gilbert town [[ Downtown Detroit), a stronger growing regional business base, new exotic restaurants and retails, boutique hotels, mega lofts and super condos.


Give it about 25 years and Detroit's population will be back up again.

---

Detroit's population may increase slightly, but it will never reach it's zenith again, of 2 million people, in the early to mid 50"s, when it was the 4th largest city in the U.S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colombian Dan

Metro Detroit hit its peak in 1970. Metro Seattle and Minnesota could both over take Metro Detroit in the 2020 census. I've relocated to Atlanta after more than 40 years in Metro Detroit and 2 years in Bogotá Colombia. If there's any doubt about the downward spiral of Detroit, look no further than the wealth evaporation from Oakland county; once the nation's 4th wealthiest county....

---

Until Detroit/Michigan can attract industries beyond automotive [[which is in a secular decline) that are growing, more recession-proof and creates plenty of high-paying jobs, it will remaing stagnant or even decline further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

Detroit's population may increase slightly, but it will never reach it's zenith again, of 2 million people, in the early to mid 50"s, when it was the 4th largest city in the U.S.

---

I rarely say never, however, having grown up in the late 40's and 50's in Detroit I would have to agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Former_Detroiter

I rarely say never, however, having grown up in the late 40's and 50's in Detroit I would have to agree.

---

I have to agree that it is very unlikely that Detroit will ever be the 4th largest city in the US again. But I can imagine how it could happen. Let me be clear that this is not intended as a prediction, and barring some kind of serious medical breakthroughs there's no chance I will live long enough to see it.

1) The demographics of the city get closer to the demographics of the region [[Detroit gets richer and whiter, metro gets poorer and blacker) and the possibility of a regional government increases, as the current governmental structure of southeastern Michigan is dumb, and many of the cities larger than Detroit [[and Detroit itself, in days gone by) have grown through amalgamation. [[Don't bother telling me this is impossible; certainly it is impossible anytime soon, but we are not talking soon, we are talking "not never". Perhaps it will become possible under the revised Michigan Constitution of 2073). If Wayne County were a city it would be the 5th largest city all by itself, so this is all you need.

2) Some of the southern cities larger than Detroit become basically uninhabitable. [[ie, Houston, Phoenix, Jacksonville) because of heat or water shortages or tropical epidemics, while Michigan becomes relatively more attractive.

3) The full automation and gamification of primary and secondary education in the US allows Detroit schoolchildren to get the same high quality education as everyone else, also making 1) more likely.

4) Changing demographics, elimination of cash in the US, widespread electronic surveillance, and removal of lead from soil and pipes in Detroit reduces crime rates to national average levels.

I'm not saying any of these will happen, but stuff that is equally speculative almost certainly will. The future isn't just some kind of short-term projection of the present.

I love how the narrative shifted from "A city that's been losing population for 60 years may soon start to see population gain and is moving in the right direction" to " Yeah well it won't be the 4th largest city again so fuck it all"
Good job fellas...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

Detroit's population may increase slightly, but it will never reach it's zenith again, of 2 million people, in the early to mid 50"s, when it was the 4th largest city in the U.S.

---

BTW, a slight correction, but Detroit was technically the 5th largest city by the early/mid 50s [[LA had already surpassed it) and was probably already slowly declining in population by that point.

If it had peaked at 2 million, my suspicion is that it was likely at some point between 1945 and 1950, just as wartime employment was winding down and the soldiers were returning home, yet when suburban sprawl was just kicking into full gear.

Right now Detroit's black population in 2017 has been decreased rapidly to 77 percent while its white population increase slowly to 13 percent. The Hispanic population has been increased very slowly to 7 percent.


Detroit 2050:

pop. 970,990

48.9% black
37.3% white
10.1% hispanic
2.7% other

Now that's bring back diversity. Detroit's pop will be stable during that time. But development and gentrification will continue. At least the Detroit Lions will win their first Super Bowl by then.

it's not growing in the distressed neighborhoods. there are still plenty of empty houses and smaller apartment complexes, including those that are too devastated to rehab.

I feel like this is the next big task that the Mayor and the city need to tackle. They have done pretty well getting city services back to acceptable-ish and bringing business back, now they need to tackle the population problem. Offering incentives or some way to bring people back into areas outside the CBD. Obviously this may come naturally, but helping it along is necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonWylie

I feel like this is the next big task that the Mayor and the city need to tackle. They have done pretty well getting city services back to acceptable-ish and bringing business back, now they need to tackle the population problem. Offering incentives or some way to bring people back into areas outside the CBD. Obviously this may come naturally, but helping it along is necessary.

---

A lot of what would spark population growth is beyond the mayor's control.

Even St. Louis and Cleveland, which are pretty healthy from a city services and balanced budget standpoint, continue to experience population decline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Former_Detroiter

I rarely say never, however, having grown up in the late 40's and 50's in Detroit I would have to agree.

---

I think this is not a long range reality. The entire eastern seaboard of the US will eventually be forced to migrate elsewhere. The southwest US will be dried out and the West Coast not attractive for a myriad of reasons. Peak oil will limit real sprawl and the midwest megaopolis has the infrastructure, resources, and economic clout to handle the incoming wave of domestic refugees. Our next war is for water, and I personally bought a home within the Great Lakes Water Compact area. I'm not a doomsday prepper, but I'd like to ensure some environmentally safety for my descendants. Third Coast = Best Coast

Facts for naysayers:
Oklahoma and Arkansas were bracing for their worst-ever flooding
Camp Fire CA - why is no one in jail?
Intense Tropical Cyclone Idai
2018 Global Catastrophe Recap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

BTW, a slight correction, but Detroit was technically the 5th largest city by the early/mid 50s [[LA had already surpassed it) and was probably already slowly declining in population by that point.

If it had peaked at 2 million, my suspicion is that it was likely at some point between 1945 and 1950, just as wartime employment was winding down and the soldiers were returning home, yet when suburban sprawl was just kicking into full gear.

---

Yeah, you may be right. It held the position of 5th largest city up to the 1980 census, when the population started declining, and cities like Houston and Phoenix surpassed it.

Detroit reached the 2 million mark briefly in 1954.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gistok

Detroit reached the 2 million mark briefly in 1954.

---

So that's post-war, pre-suburban migration and initial baby boom.

I'm skeptical of that 2 million number in 1954, and Census estimates in general as time has proven more than once.

That means it would have declined by over 300,000 people in only 5 years. Detroit didn't even see that rate of decline from 2000 to 2010, in the midst of a burgeoning fiscal crisis and economic collapse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

Detroit didn't even see that rate of decline from 2000 to 2010, in the midst of a burgeoning fiscal crisis and economic collapse.

---

By 2000 most of the decline was over. Most of it took place in the mid 70s through the 90s. By 2000 pioneers were moving back in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

By 2000 most of the decline was over. Most of it took place in the mid 70s through the 90s. By 2000 pioneers were moving back in.

---

You dropped the "/s" ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

I'm skeptical of that 2 million number in 1954, and Census estimates in general as time has proven more than once.

That means it would have declined by over 300,000 people in only 5 years. Detroit didn't even see that rate of decline from 2000 to 2010, in the midst of a burgeoning fiscal crisis and economic collapse.

---

When I went to DPS in the 1960s and early 1970s, we were taught that 1954 was the peak year when Detroit's population hit [[or got close to) the 2 million mark. That was also the time when Detroit had the most automotive jobs in the city.

If you can find a yearly estimate of the city's population [[besides the census every 10 years)... I'm open to being corrected. I could not find such a yearly listing online. Otherwise I stand by what was taught to me in school.

Anecdotally speaking... Northland opened in 1954, Eastland in 1957... Packard Plant closed in 1958. The houses in my SCS neighborhood were all built between 1956-58. So Detroit's population loss in the 1950s did not start slowly. Also the Lodge and Ford Freeways cut huge chunks of neighborhoods out of the city in that era.

Quote:

---

Detroit's population is close to the same size now as it was in 1910, before the city's automotive boom began. The city's population peaked at 1.86 million in 1950. The 2012 U.S. Census showed the city with about 700,000 residents. Detroit covers 138.76 square miles, with a shoreline of 4.12 miles.

---

Via Forbes article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gistok

When I went to DPS in the 1960s and early 1970s, we were taught that 1954 was the peak year when Detroit's population hit [[or got close to) the 2 million mark. That was also the time when Detroit had the most automotive jobs in the city.

If you can find a yearly estimate of the city's population [[besides the census every 10 years)... I'm open to being corrected. I could not find such a yearly listing online. Otherwise I stand by what was taught to me in school.

Anecdotally speaking... Northland opened in 1954, Eastland in 1957... Packard Plant closed in 1958. The houses in my SCS neighborhood were all built between 1956-58. So Detroit's population loss in the 1950s did not start slowly. Also the Lodge and Ford Freeways cut huge chunks of neighborhoods out of the city in that era.

---

I believe that Detroit's population got above 1.9M, but it probably never hit 2M. To get there it would have required the city to grow much faster between 1950 and 1954 than the average growth from 1940 to 1950. However, the difference between 1.9M and 2M is psychological. Regular people wouldn't be able to discern the difference at street level in 1952.

I always thought that at its peak Detroit had 1.8 + million residents, never reaching 2 million. The first I have heard the 2 million number was in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I believe that Detroit's population got above 1.9M, but it probably never hit 2M. To get there it would have required the city to grow much faster between 1950 and 1954 than the average growth from 1940 to 1950. However, the difference between 1.9M and 2M is psychological. Regular people wouldn't be able to discern the difference at street level in 1952.

---

Downtowns relative to their populations were really crowded compared to today since everyone came into the city for shopping, medical & legal appointments, services, movies etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by softailrider

I always thought that at its peak Detroit had 1.8 + million residents, never reaching 2 million. The first I have heard the 2 million number was in this thread.

---

It topped out at 1.85 on the official census, but there are many articles and academic material that speculate the city's population probably didn't go into decline until the recession of 1953 - 1954.

Back on topic. It would be news on the national scene if the Detroit population took a bump even if it was very slight in the 2020 census.

Good news is good news and the reality is a majority of people are followers not leaders.

Any change in public perception to the positive is beneficial to the entire metro region. The “Detroit is shit but the suburbs are nice” is not enough anymore. Suburbs are as common as a Walmart in this country and Detroit’s are nothing special by themselves.

I'd be shocked if Detroit has over 500,000 residents. A curisory look at Google maps shows a majority of Detroit's land area to be vacant. Secondly, those that do live in Detroit and have cars are highly likely to have address in the suburbs to avoid outrageous auto insurance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colombian Dan

I'd be shocked if Detroit has over 500,000 residents. A curisory look at Google maps shows a majority of Detroit's land area to be vacant. Secondly, those that do live in Detroit and have cars are highly likely to have address in the suburbs to avoid outrageous auto insurance.

---

Not necessarily... if State Police motorist stops in the first year of the state takeover of Belle Isle is any indication... some will make their first insurance payment so they can get their license plate tabs renewed... and then let their insurance lapse for another year.... :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colombian Dan

I'd be shocked if Detroit has over 500,000 residents. A curisory look at Google maps shows a majority of Detroit's land area to be vacant. Secondly, those that do live in Detroit and have cars are highly likely to have address in the suburbs to avoid outrageous auto insurance.

---

I tend to agree. Large swaths of the city just feel emptier than ever.

There was a significant outflow of people during the Bing administration that wasn't accounted for in the last census.

I also remember similar conversations taking place back in 2009 about Detroit's decline slowing [[based on the Census estimates that were way off) before everyone was hit with the official 2010 number.

Two thoughts:

1. I understand 1953 to be the population peak...

2. Everyone said Rome would never get back over a million in-habitants after it was sacked, now here they are close to 3 million...

1953

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1953

2. Everyone said Rome would never get back over a million in-habitants after it was sacked, now here they are close to 3 million..

---

And it only took 500 years......:rolleyes:

Census numbers are not based on vehicle registrations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uncledave54

And it only took 500 years......:rolleyes:

---

And I'm sure our Great Great Great Grandchildren look forward to witnessing it too, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colombian Dan

I'd be shocked if Detroit has over 500,000 residents. A curisory look at Google maps shows a majority of Detroit's land area to be vacant. Secondly, those that do live in Detroit and have cars are highly likely to have address in the suburbs to avoid outrageous auto insurance.

---

1. the city is not majority vacant land
2. 500,000 is outside of the realm of any reasonable prediction. you made this up out of your behind
3. You can't judge population numbers based on a hunch
4. worry about your southern backwater and the abortion bill that just passed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Worldsgreatest

1. the city is not majority vacant land
2. 500,000 is outside of the realm of any reasonable prediction. you made this up out of your behind
3. You can't judge population numbers based on a hunch
4. worry about your southern backwater and the abortion bill that just passed.

---

IMO number 4 is hitting below the belt and has nothing to do with Detroit's population...

I mean people love hitting below the belt or outright fabricating stories about the city so why should I care?

So concerned with Detroit yet you live in America's poverty center.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Worldsgreatest

I mean people love hitting below the belt or outright fabricating stories about the city so why should I care?

---

That's just his OPINION... he didn't state that as fact. People on this forum are allowed their opinion... just like people on this forum are allowed to be shrill and annoying... :eek:

Those of us that live in the city see that there is definitely an increase of population outside of downtown compared to 2010.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Census numbers are not based on vehicle registrations.

---

Yes! Thank you for that. More specifically, the official 10 year census is not based on vehicle registrations, although the yearly census will use them as part of their model for population estimates. Multiple addresses are nothing new or unique to Detroit, especially for younger people, and there are plenty of tools available to account for it.

There is no centralized system for reporting your primary residence. What you self report to the census is separate from what you tell the SOS or insurance company, and separate still from what you report for taxes. The definition for primary residence is similar between them, but not always so cut and dry. It can come down to the question of where you slept last night, in some cases.

As for counting those "bunking" in Downtown Detroit while claiming non-City of Detroit residency, this from John Gallagher's column in today's Free Press provides what may be the best guess as to how many do.

Quote:

---

Tax avoidance in the form of people living downtown but claiming suburban residency to avoid city income taxes or high auto insurance rates is often cited as a problem.

How big an issue is it? One indication comes from the American Community Survey, a product of the U.S. Census Bureau. The survey estimated that in 2016, 20,451 people lived in the 48226 [[downtown) and 48201 [[Midtown) ZIP codes. But data from the Internal Revenue Service showed tax filers claimed just 9,740 exemptions that year. The IRS believes the number of exemptions approximates a total population for a given area.

And if a 2-1 ratio of residents to tax exemptions claimed was not enough of an indicator of possible tax avoidance, consider this: While the population of those two ZIP codes increased 33% between 2011 and 2016, the number of exemptions claimed on IRS returns actually dropped, to 9,740 from 9,816. That would normally indicate a smaller population, not a boom in new residents.

In recent years, the City of Detroit has tried to ferret out tax avoiders in several ways, including demanding downtown landlords turn over the names of residents to be checked against tax rolls. Generally, landlords have refused, citing the privacy of their tenants, but gradually the city has made progress in collecting back taxes.

City officials agree some downtowners have valid reasons for not filing tax returns. Many elderly residents may not have any taxable income and therefore don't need to file. The number of government-subsidized senior residential units in the greater downtown indicates that this population could number a few thousand.

---

What I could be curious to see are the City of Detroit tax data for downtown, not just for a head count but to see revenue direction. I am guessing that many of the new residents, who are playing it straight, are higher income and likely causing per capita revenue for the area to rise.

Another question is that if, as the article mentions, the downtown area creates 58% of the jobs in the city, it is likely that tax, resident and non-resident, is being captured via withholding. I would be curious as to the size, direction and break out of that of that. That includes professional athletes among others. So how much tax is really generated by, for instance, the arenas alone.

It will grow when supply meets demand. Feet on the ground and so far nothing of the sort is truly happening in a large scale....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bradley

It will grow when supply meets demand. Feet on the ground and so far nothing of the sort is truly happening in a large scale....

---

And when the crime gets controlled, if ever. All these young black women being killed, certainly doesn't help it's cause....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

And when the crime gets controlled, if ever. All these young black women being killed, certainly doesn't help it's cause....

---

Are you talking about today's news regarding the serial killer they are looking for on the east side? I'm just curious as to where the demographic you mention is coming from, and how it compares to males, white, Hispanic, etc., if there are those types of statistics out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bartocktoo

Are you talking about today's news regarding the serial killer they are looking for on the east side? I'm just curious as to where the demographic you mention is coming from, and how it compares to males, white, Hispanic, etc., if there are those types of statistics out there.

---

Yes, I'm referring to the 5 or 6 black women killed in the last 2 weeks. Mostly on the Eastside. As far as demographics and statistics are concerned, I don't have a clue. I know about as much as Chief Craig at this point, but I would suspect a black male is probably the perpetrator.

John Gallagher's use of the IRS count of exemptions is, in some sense, good news for the city. The Census Bureau's American Community Survey counts a much larger population in those zip codes than one would expect on the basis of the IRS data. This strongly suggests that people residing in these zip codes are reporting their address correctly but when they
fill out forms with their employer they put down a suburban address to cut their city income tax rate from 2.4% to 1.2%.

If this pattern persists, it seems likely that the census count in 2020 for Detroit may be more accurate than some expect. The census data are confidential for 72 years so no one needs to fear that the Michigan or Detroit tax authorities will get census data to see who reported to the census that they lived in Detroit but claimed another residence for tax purposes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

Yes, I'm referring to the 5 or 6 black women killed in the last 2 weeks. Mostly on the Eastside. As far as demographics and statistics are concerned, I don't have a clue. I know about as much as Chief Craig at this point, but I would suspect a black male is probably the perpetrator.

---

2 were in a car with 2 black males in what was an in-car drive by shooting. All four were shot.

The serial killer has not been identified [[I don't think as of today) as black or white. The two women identified are in their 50s. One is black, one is white.

The young nursing student who was murdered [[and black) was murdered by a multiple sex offender and I am beyond comprehension why the person who murdered her was out on the street to begin with.

I did see something where roughly 88% percent of the murdered in Detroit are male, roughly the same percentage [[a little less) are black males.

My baited point was that people...people...should not be murdered, period. And the more murders, the more dangerous the city, and it makes it that much harder to get folks to move in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bartocktoo

My baited point was that people...people...should not be murdered, period. And the more murders, the more dangerous the city, and it makes it that much harder to get folks to move in.

---

It is the elephant in the room. Murder. It scares the shit out of people. It is awful for business. It hurts jobs, opportunity and wealth building for the majority in the entire Metro Detroit area. The homicides in Detroit are nationally notorious.

The ‘All cities are bad so live with it’ mentality we have here is a proven failure. Many cities in America are rather nice now and a majority are improving at a faster rate then metro Detroit because they eliminated that archaic thinking decades ago.

Capital prefers to invest where human life is highly regarded and the reputation for that ethic exists regionally not just in isolated pockets.

Community policing is showing promise in other places and it is well past the time for Michigan and Detroit to make a larger investment in it tied with technology and higher quality training for law enforcement officers. It takes money to solve problems. Finger pointing does not work. If it did metro Detroit would be paradise.

If we took a drive through the inner city neighborhoods 20 years ago, and we took that drive today I don’t think you would notice a huge difference. I’m not referring to midtown or downtown, I talking about lower east side, upper east side, all over the city really. Some neighborhoods do look better, most don’t, a lot look worse. The neighborhood business districts are in a shambles as before or do not exist anymore. There’s many more vacant lots now, that is noticeable to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit

It is the elephant in the room. Murder. It scares the shit out of people. It is awful for business. It hurts jobs, opportunity and wealth building for the majority in the entire Metro Detroit area. The homicides in Detroit are nationally notorious.

The ‘All cities are bad so live with it’ mentality we have here is a proven failure. Many cities in America are rather nice now and a majority are improving at a faster rate then metro Detroit because they eliminated that archaic thinking decades ago.

Capital prefers to invest where human life is highly regarded and the reputation for that ethic exists regionally not just in isolated pockets.

Community policing is showing promise in other places and it is well past the time for Michigan and Detroit to make a larger investment in it tied with technology and higher quality training for law enforcement officers. It takes money to solve problems. Finger pointing does not work. If it did metro Detroit would be paradise.

---

It's not just the murders. Property crimes, minor and major, continue. You can't leave anything out, no matter how petty you think it is, unattended. Never leave anything exposed in your vehicle even if there's "nothing in it". Car windows get smashed out for $5 phone chargers and cheap gloves. License plates and tabs get stolen. Garages and homes get broken into. And people wonder why the insurance rates are so high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

It's not just the murders. Property crimes, minor and major, continue. You can't leave anything out, no matter how petty you think it is, unattended. Never leave anything exposed in your vehicle even if there's "nothing in it". Car windows get smashed out for $5 phone chargers and cheap gloves. License plates and tabs get stolen. Garages and homes get broken into. And people wonder why the insurance rates are so high.

---

I agree. All the above issues are out of control. A major initiative has to be implemented on violent crime and all crimes and must be successful if Detroit is going to have a sustained rebound to its economy. Other cities are way ahead and still improving on this issue and there is no chance of competing against them if failure continues to happen here.

Detroit has to be for everyone to be desirable. Not just the few who enjoy it having a hard edge and then hide in their secure apartment/condo when they want to escape the crime.

The suburbs cannot make it on their own anymore. They will continue to become less as well to the suburbs of cities that are not crime ridden. It is no longer 1980.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by softailrider

If we took a drive through the inner city neighborhoods 20 years ago, and we took that drive today I don’t think you would notice a huge difference. I’m not referring to midtown or downtown, I talking about lower east side, upper east side, all over the city really. Some neighborhoods do look better, most don’t, a lot look worse. The neighborhood business districts are in a shambles as before or do not exist anymore. There’s many more vacant lots now, that is noticeable to me.

---

I think this is basically correct. The main neighborhoods that are better/stable are

1) the ones that were always pretty OK
2) a few that neighbor the ones that were always pretty OK
3) Greater downtown.

The rest of the city is continuing to empty out. I expect this to continue for a while.

But nonetheless the city is close to stabilizing its population overall--the declining areas continually have fewer people to lose, while the improving parts are growing.