Philadelphia grew for first time in nearly 60 years

[Danny]

Philly has, and has always had, a very different economy from Detroit's, which is the main factor. It also held onto enough of its urban middle class to keep the city from tipping into a complete slide. 3 of the reasons for that are, a large business/office community downtown that did not flee to the suburbs, a mass transit system that enables large numbers of people to get into and out of the central city, and around the core area, without a car, and the preservation of a lot of attractive historic housing, despite calls to "urban renew" it out of existence a few decades ago.

In Detroit, we never had most people working downtown, but in manufacturing facilities spread throughout the city and the area, none of our largest companies were ever headquartered downtown [[until GM's move to Ren Cen), and many of our secondary and support businesses fled to the suburbs at the first sign of problems long ago. Mass transit is of course largely non-existent, and we destroyed many of our beautiful old neighborhoods, or simply left them to rot away like Brush Park. Instead of building a walkable city like Philly, with nice transit friendly older neighborhoods and active street-level business centers, we just kept tearing stuff down so that we could park yet more cars - even as the number of cars coming into the city was declining.

Great post and I agree with your statement. The City of Brotherly Love has its urban problems and its housing stock [[ moslty New England styled row houses), but ethnic folks can deal with the every day violent crime and slum clearances. Those folks really stand up for their town and defend it with their lives.

People in Detroit couldn't get out the 'Pre Mississippian' culture as a result white and ethnic flight and leaving mostly blacks to be trapped in the urban pyschological institutions we called 'The Ghetto'.

[Ray1936]

Interesting way to tour the neighborhoods of Philadelphia is to go to Google Maps - street view and just click the little orange man on to any Philly street away from downtown. Amazing how narrow their streets are.

[bailey]

You quote a wikipedia entry to prove some point about Philly and Detroit being dissimilar? Have you ever even been to Philly? I'm there several times a year. I know what it looks like.

Detroit also has several colleges and/or universities, and even more in the surrounding areas [[one of which is a very highly ranked university). In fact, the only school that really differentiates Philadelphia proper's university stock from Detroit's is Penn [[and it is an Ivy League school... so duh, right?). And outside of University City [[and not very far outside of it, I must stress), Philly's neighborhoods appear to be just as depressed as many of the neighborhoods in Detroit. Granted, you don't find areas depopulated to the extent that some sections of Detroit [[well, maybe in North Philadelphia), but Philly gets rough too.

I'm simply trying to point out a very simple fact that is being ignored. Philly has a huge economic driver and some pretty significant differences that has kept it from falling to the depths that Detroit has. Remove the 500k-1 million people and a similar numbers of jobs that are derived from that huge driver and you'd have a point that Detroit and Philly are the same.

Has Philly had a rough go in the manufacturing sector? sure. Was there de-poulation? yes, HALF of what Detroit saw over the same period. Is there blight and abandonment? Yes. To the level of Detroit... debateable. I would say no where near it.

Wikipedia was the first source that came up with a fairly succinct summation of the point. Is anything in the summation wrong? Should I have compiled the data from US News instead to back up my point.....or should only the Census Bureau be used as a reference?

I don't think you should take Bailey so seriously. It's not like he's doing serious research or anything. He just enjoys pissing on Detroit from his remove.

I don't enjoy pissing on anyone... I simply can not stand the willful and strident ignorance that gets posted here... as illustrated by this:

Detroit also has several colleges and/or universities, and even more in the surrounding areas [[one of which is a very highly ranked university). In fact, the only school that really differentiates Philadelphia proper's university stock from Detroit's is Penn [[and it is an Ivy League school... so duh, right?).

Yup the ONLY difference is UM is in AA [[30 minutes away) and Penn . I mean you can not be serious.

[Detroitnerd]

I don't enjoy pissing on anyone... I simply can not stand the willful and strident ignorance that gets posted here.

Unless it's your own, I suppose.

[iheartthed]

While Philadelphia has suffered many of the same issues of Detroit, that does not mean that the cities do not have different histories and experiences. Simply because they are similar in land area and once were similar in population does not make the cities similar. Of course, the cities do have some similarities, but there are far more significant differences, some of which include:

1) Detroit grew later than Philadelphia, and on a different economic base. Philadelphia reached 500,000 people prior to 1860, whereas Detroit did not reach such heights until just after 1920. Likewise, Philadelphia reached 1 million people just prior to 1890, whereas Detroit did not pass the 1 million mark until shortly after 1920. Philadelphia had more gradual growth, whereas Detroit really rose on modern manufacturing.

I don't see how this is relevant to what I said, which was that Philly is the most similar very large city to Detroit today. Chicago was barely much over 100,000 residents when Philly broke the 500,000 resident barrier. Is it now unfair to compare Chicago to places like Baltimore or Philly, since they were roughly twice Chicago's size [[and greater) in 1860? [[And FYI, Philadelphia grew nearly 3 fold in the span of a decade [1850-1860] to break the 500,000 mark. It hasn't had a growth rate that high since. It has actually lagged well behind the other 4 former industrial powerhouses.)

2) Philadelphia has historically had a more diversified economy than Detroit.

This may be the case now, but I doubt that we can say this definitively for all points in Detroit and Philadelphia's history.

3) As one poster has demonstrated, Philadelphia has had a larger set of "anchor institutions" [[hospitals, universities, etc.) than Detroit, helping the city weather downturns.

Already addressed in my reply to that poster.

4) Philadelphia has been the destination of far more immigrants than Detroit.

Measured from when?

5) Philadelphia is not as racially segregated as Detroit.

Along municipal lines? No. Along neighborhood lines. Yes.

6) Philadelphia benefits from being located between Washington, D.C. and New York, the former of which has experienced incredibly dramatic growth during the past 40+ years, and the latter of which has been growing significantly for 20+ years. In contrast, Detroit forms the major city in its metro region, relatively unconnected to any other major city

I don't see how this is relevant to comparisons of Philadelphia proper to Detroit proper. And if anything, this distinction would hurt Philly and help Detroit.

[bailey]

Unless it's your own, I suppose.

Well, you have a point. It must have been the emoticon and the constant sardonic comments that sold me. Detroit and Philly are exactly the same and if Detroit people in general would just realize the only thing keeping Detroit from being exactly like New York City is their lack of self esteem and a two mile closed loop street level people mover... and not a thing else... we'd be golden. Hooray!

3) As one poster has demonstrated, Philadelphia has had a larger set of "anchor institutions" [[hospitals, universities, etc.) than Detroit, helping the city weather downturns.
Already addressed in my reply to that poster.

If by "addressed" you mean "completely ignored" ...then yes you addressed it.

[iheartthed]

If by "addressed" you mean "completely ignored" ...then yes you addressed it.

Okay, so in your opinion... Which big American city most closely mirrors the situation of Detroit? Just so we are on the same page, let's draw the line for "big city" to include only those with an inner-city population of 800,000 or above [[or if you want to measure by MSA, those with populations of 3.5M and above).

[cman710]

Iheartthed, you are missing the point. I never stated that you could not compare Detroit and Philadelphia simply because they have many differences. Obviously there can be a comparison. My post was in response to your assertion that I was incorrect to state that Detroit and Philadelphia have had very different experiences. I think that the information I presented convincingly refutes that claim. Perhaps Philadelphia is the most similar big city to Detroit, but that only points up the fact that Detroit finds itself in a very unique situation, unlike any other big city.


Your other responses seek to brush aside my points without refuting them:

• Philadelphia has historically had a more diversified economy than Detroit. That is part of the reason the city did not decline as much as Detroit, which has had an economy principally based on manufacturing jobs. Clearly, at some point in history, Philadelphia also relied heavily on manufacturing jobs, but you could say that about every major city in existence prior to the last 50 years. You have not refuted this point.
• We do not need to get into the fine points of which city has greater anchor institutions, but you have shown that Boston has more than Philadelphia, not that Detroit has as many as Philadelphia.
• For immigration, our time period clearly is the last 40 years, the period of major decline. I challenge you to demonstrate that Detroit has received more immigrants in that period than Philadelphia. You will not be able to do so.
• As far as housing segregation, neighborhood racial segregation occurs in nearly every major city. There have been several measures, however, showing that the Detroit metro area is among the most segregated in the country, more than Philadelphia. See here, here, or here if you require proof.
• Your dismissal of the importance of Philadelphia as sitting between DC and New York is astonishing. The growth of DC and New York have not hurt Philadelphia. If anything, it has helped Philadelphia. Philadelphia has a great location between the political capital and the financial capital of the nation. You cannot credibly claim that such a location has not significantly helped Philadelphia's economic growth.

[ghettopalmetto]

If Philadelphia's proximity to New York and DC has had such an effect on Philly, then why does Baltimore [[35 miles from DC) still look like the Seventh Circle of Hell? For that matter, is there something so magical in the water in DC and New York that prevented their own declines? History says otherwise.

Philly does have a lot of institutions. Comparable versions of these institutions exist in Michigan, but many of them are in the suburbs. What Philly does have going for it:

*Attractive, walkable city center
*Large supply of affordable building stock [[see Jane Jacobs re: the need for old buildings)
*A Center City that hasn't been imploded to build "landscaped and lighted parking lots" and "temporary parks" on every other block.
*Decent public transit, including not only an extensive bus system, but streetcars, subway, an extensive regional rail system that reaches into New Jersey and Delaware, and a subway line that crosses into New Jersey; this includes convenient regional rail access to the airport
*Frequent Amtrak connections to the economic centers of New York, Baltimore, Wilmington, and DC

These are things that attract young, educated professionals. Employers are in turn attracted by the presence of young, educated professionals.

[dfunkycity]

Philly's people care about their city. Its like Detroit used to be once upon a time.

Proximity to NY and DC help but the fact that Philly is not a one horse town [[economically speaking) is why it was able to easily re-invent itself and draw people to it.

If you long for the Detroit of the 60s or 70s then by all means take a trip to philly and its like going back in time.

[Whitehouse]

Speaking about Philly, I just encountered this in my everlasting journey along the worldwide web. Detroit has more in common with Philadelphia besides declinging populations. Take a look at the Philadelphia Metropolitan Opera House. Also in a massive state of disrepair. However, this house has a few things in favour compared to the theatres in Detroit. For one, this still has a tennant in parts of the building. It was bought from the city by a chruch community in the 90's. And second, this house is placed on the list of historic places in America.

All is not lost for this old beast which was build by Roger Hammerstein I.

[cman710]

If Philadelphia's proximity to New York and DC has had such an effect on Philly, then why does Baltimore [[35 miles from DC) still look like the Seventh Circle of Hell? For that matter, is there something so magical in the water in DC and New York that prevented their own declines? History says otherwise.

Your question assumes that proximity to New York and DC would definitely make a city prosperous. That is not true. What I said is that Philadelphia has been helped by its proximity to New York and DC. Likewise, Baltimore has undoubtedly benefited from being close to DC. However, that proximity, in itself, will not guarantee prosperity. Both Baltimore and Philadelphia are better off for not being isolated cities.

For your other point, do not forget that New York and DC have experienced awful declines, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s. New York may have lost only 10% of its population in that period, but that is still over 700,000 people!

[MichMatters]

To explain the defining difference between Detroit and Philly: it's the economy, stupid. Philly hasn't relied on manufacturing as its bread and butter for probably over a century, now. It long since transformed itself into service center. And, yeah, it's historic role brought on by its proximity as a "cheaper NYC" surely didn't and doesn't hurt. You move Philly to where Pittsburgh is, today, and it'd have not turned out a success story, at least of these proportions. And, as others have said, proximity counts for A LOT. If Baltimore, Philly, and DC would have all developed further apart, we'd not even be talking of serious comebacks. They've fed off of each others talents and economies since their creations. That despite them having very similar social problems to Detroit [[Baltimore regularly ranks up there with, and sometimes tops, Detroit in terms of murder rate.) they manage to always come back from the bring of disaster is a testament to proximity and a diversified economy. Baltimore, in particular, is still a very rough town, but with enough of an economy to lessen the effect of the social problems.

[English]

I was just in Philadelphia for a week in November, and I will be there for a week later this month [[both trips for work). So while I can't talk about stats, I can talk about what I saw last month.

Whenever I'm out of town, if I am able, I like to read the local newspaper and watch the local evening news. Philly's news reminded me of Detroit's media in the 1980s... I watched for a half hour, and there was nothing but murder after murder. There were no human interest stories whatsoever, and the terms used to describe the criminals by the newscasters are terms I have rarely heard Detroit anchors used. [["Well, I'm glad they caught that thug.") It was an absolutely jaw-dropping experience, and unnerved me... and when you are from the D, it takes a h*ll of a lot to unnerve you.

Then there were the native Philadelphians whom I chatted with during my downtime, both professionals in my field and workers. They reminded me a lot of the folks in New Orleans that I talked to in 2004... who told me that "everybody's trying to get out of here... it's terrible here..." exactly 18 months before Katrina. Until that visit, I had NEVER heard residents of ANY city sound more desperate than we do... I kept pointing to their tourism, their historic culture, the revitalized Riverwalk, and the French Quarter... and at least a couple dozen people would either get annoyed or a little angry. "That's for the TOURISTS. There's NOTHING here for us... I'm moving to Houston or Atlanta." That next year, I thought about those conversations as I watched their city drown.

During this visit, the Philadelphians sounded the same way. Other than my visits to New Orleans, Philly remains the only American city where I haven't had to hear Detroit denigrated a single time, or listen to a single person expressing their condolences that I live there. In fact, one lady from North Philly assured me that her city *will* become Detroit in another 20 years if things continue this way. I had to assure her that no, it would not, that Detroit was a perfect storm, and no one was abandoning Philly wholesale... but she swore to me that Philly was now more violent than Detroit, and businesses were leaving, along with some regatta [[I think that's what she said) that's been there forever.

I think that the economy must be getting people down, and Philadelphia will never be Detroit [[just as PA will never be MI). However, the Philly natives assured me, to a man and a woman, that ordinary people in their metro depended on manufacturing, too... and that "we know things are bad there, but things are getting bad here, too."

The tone in this country is changing. Detroit is becoming more than the butt of jokes. We are now a national cautionary tale.

Disclaimer: all of the above are my observations from a few weeks spent in Philadelphia over the past three and a half years. Take what you like and leave the rest.

[Don K]

Yes, part of it is the Detroit area's marriage to the auto industry, but not all. Since 1980, the Detroit metropolitan [[defined as Wayne, Macomb, and Oakland) population has been about flat, while Philadelphia's [[defined as Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery counties in PA, and Camden, Gloucester, and Burlington counties in NJ) has grown about 9%. That to me is the difference caused by having a non-diversified economy in the Detroit area [[about 400,000 or so people).

The question for me is why did a greater percentage of Detroiters move to the suburbs than Philadelphians. Since 1950, Detroit has lost more than half of its population, while Philadelphia has lost about 30% of its. In the same time, Detroit's suburbs have grown by about 160%, while Philadelphia's have grown about 130%. And it's not just a post-riot situation - in the 1950's, Detroit's population declined 10%, while Philadelphia's was down 3%, and in the 60's Detroit was down another 9% while Philadelphia was down about 3% again.

One place to look might be the attachment of people to their neighborhoods. I would bet a large percentage of the 1950 Detroiters were relatively recent [[1920's or 1940's) migrants, while the white working class in Philadelphia lived in neighborhoods that had been settled since sometime in the 1800's.

[d.mcc]

I don't enjoy pissing on anyone... I simply can not stand the willful and strident ignorance that gets posted here... as illustrated by this:
Yup the ONLY difference is UM is in AA [[30 minutes away) and Penn . I mean you can not be serious.

I guess students that went to Wayne State, University of Detroit, Lawrence Tech, Oakland, and the likes can just piss on their degrees before they throw them into the fire then?

[Hamtragedy]

The Second Empire architecture in that city is absolutely stunning. That includes the neighborhoods.

[English]

The question for me is why did a greater percentage of Detroiters move to the suburbs than Philadelphians. Since 1950, Detroit has lost more than half of its population, while Philadelphia has lost about 30% of its. In the same time, Detroit's suburbs have grown by about 160%, while Philadelphia's have grown about 130%. And it's not just a post-riot situation - in the 1950's, Detroit's population declined 10%, while Philadelphia's was down 3%, and in the 60's Detroit was down another 9% while Philadelphia was down about 3% again.

One place to look might be the attachment of people to their neighborhoods. I would bet a large percentage of the 1950 Detroiters were relatively recent [[1920's or 1940's) migrants, while the white working class in Philadelphia lived in neighborhoods that had been settled since sometime in the 1800's.

I think you're on to something here. One also has to look at the cost of living in the Midwest vs. the East Coast. I wonder if it might have been more cost-prohibitive for ethnic whites in the East to move out. It's the most densely populated area in the nation [[other than SoCal), so space/land/real estate is at a premium. That isn't really the case in Michigan.

Also, don't forget about the role of a city's upper crust elite. Ours are a little different than those in other Northern cities. Compare Henry Ford and the auto barons to the rich families of Chicago, New York... and yes, Philadelphia. In many cities, the majority of the cultural institutions are within city limits. This was never the case in Detroit... I've always had to explain to my out-of-town visitors the significance of Dearborn, for instance.

Now, I suppose the question is what happened to the original French elite families? I know some people with roots in French Detroit, a few of whom are regular DYes posters. Sometimes I wonder what the city might have been like with a 300 year old elite, much like New England has.

[staticstate]

simple. it's a hard truth, but it's reality. Detroit needs to get tough on dealing with waste - whether it be people, garbage, space or whatnot, The people who want a prosperous life need to stand up to those that don't. get rid of the crap and life will get better. don't wait for government or others to do it for you.

[MichMatters]

In many cities, the majority of the cultural institutions are within city limits. This was never the case in Detroit...

Actually, it's been the case in Detroit, too. In fact, cultural and entertainment institutions were probably were probably more constituted in Detroit than most other cities. Detroit had all of the major museums, all of the major theaters, all of the metropolitan universities, most all of the areas most wealthy residential enclaves, etc...and that's even still true, today, as far as the actual cultural institutions are concerned [[i.e. museums, opera house, theaters...) with a few major exceptions like the zoo and the Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village.

Really, I'm not sure that was at all the difference.

simple. it's a hard truth, but it's reality. Detroit needs to get tough on dealing with waste - whether it be people, garbage, space or whatnot, The people who want a prosperous life need to stand up to those that don't. get rid of the crap and life will get better. don't wait for government or others to do it for you.

You know, this doesn't sound like well thought out advice, at all. Can you explain to me, for instance, how exactly you "get rid of" "crap" people? You do know that people are human beings, and thus can't [[and shouldn't) be thrown out like you would garbage, right? But, much like garbage, ironically, when you do place people in landfills or try to file them away instead of recycling them, the problem doesn't actually disappear.

[krapug1]

Just to chime in here as someone who lived in Phillly twice. First in 1985 to 1986 on a work assignment, and then from 2000 to 2002. Both times I lived witin the paramiters of "Center City", which includes a number of neighborhoods such as, Old City, Queen Village, Rittenhouse Square, Chinatown and the like.

First, for quite awhile now the Census Department has stated that Philly has the 3rd largest "downtown" population of major American cities [[New York being first, Chicago being 2nd). This is also where the population growth has occured recently, and it has led to the dramactic increase in the number of restaurants, clubs, and food stores that have sprung up all over Center City. Whole Foods has 2 oultets within CC, Trader Joes set up shop as well. The historic Reading Terminal market has benefited from this as well.

The weird thing has been "traditional" retail, weird as in it has been a struggle to get CC residents to shop in CC, many drive to Cherry Hill, or King of Prussia to do their shopping. This is dispite the fact that Macy's operates a store on 3 floors of the famed John Wanamaker building, and many upscale chains have stores on Walnut Street, and Chesnut Street [[west of Broad St). As a result of this The Gallery Mall on Market Street East has gone from having 3 traditional dept. stores as anchors, to today where it is anchored by Big K-Mart, and Burlington Coat Factory. The Gallery today largely serves the populas of North Philly, who lack decent stores in the 'hood.

The transportation system SEPTA, serves the entire region with a network of busses, trolleys, trackless trolleys [[bizarre looking things), and commuter rail. Other than Commuter Rail, the SEPTA network is used mostly by the urban poor. SEPTA's in-city services do not have the type of universal ridership that you see in Boston, as an example. Further in Boston you will see the thousands of people who make up the sudent population moving about the HUB area like everyone else. In Philly the student population stays mostly on their campuses.

Speaking of urban poor, Philly is alo home to several "white ghettos", like Kensington and Frankford, and it is interesting how freaked out people get they see this.

On the issue of walkability and crime, Philly has a walkable Center City, BUT you have to know where your walking. As an example if your in the middle of tony Rittenhouse Square, and decide to 'explore", a simple walk of 5 blocks south will land you in no mans land, with little buffer between the areas. This is part of the reason that crime remains a problem within Center City. You have severe poverity, and hopelessnes, within a short distance of prosperity, the two worlds do collide on occasion.

Ken

[iheartthed]

I was just in Philadelphia for a week in November, and I will be there for a week later this month [[both trips for work). So while I can't talk about stats, I can talk about what I saw last month.

Whenever I'm out of town, if I am able, I like to read the local newspaper and watch the local evening news. Philly's news reminded me of Detroit's media in the 1980s... I watched for a half hour, and there was nothing but murder after murder. There were no human interest stories whatsoever, and the terms used to describe the criminals by the newscasters are terms I have rarely heard Detroit anchors used. [["Well, I'm glad they caught that thug.") It was an absolutely jaw-dropping experience, and unnerved me... and when you are from the D, it takes a h*ll of a lot to unnerve you.

Then there were the native Philadelphians whom I chatted with during my downtime, both professionals in my field and workers. They reminded me a lot of the folks in New Orleans that I talked to in 2004... who told me that "everybody's trying to get out of here... it's terrible here..." exactly 18 months before Katrina. Until that visit, I had NEVER heard residents of ANY city sound more desperate than we do... I kept pointing to their tourism, their historic culture, the revitalized Riverwalk, and the French Quarter... and at least a couple dozen people would either get annoyed or a little angry. "That's for the TOURISTS. There's NOTHING here for us... I'm moving to Houston or Atlanta." That next year, I thought about those conversations as I watched their city drown.

During this visit, the Philadelphians sounded the same way. Other than my visits to New Orleans, Philly remains the only American city where I haven't had to hear Detroit denigrated a single time, or listen to a single person expressing their condolences that I live there. In fact, one lady from North Philly assured me that her city *will* become Detroit in another 20 years if things continue this way. I had to assure her that no, it would not, that Detroit was a perfect storm, and no one was abandoning Philly wholesale... but she swore to me that Philly was now more violent than Detroit, and businesses were leaving, along with some regatta [[I think that's what she said) that's been there forever.

I think that the economy must be getting people down, and Philadelphia will never be Detroit [[just as PA will never be MI). However, the Philly natives assured me, to a man and a woman, that ordinary people in their metro depended on manufacturing, too... and that "we know things are bad there, but things are getting bad here, too."

The tone in this country is changing. Detroit is becoming more than the butt of jokes. We are now a national cautionary tale.

Disclaimer: all of the above are my observations from a few weeks spent in Philadelphia over the past three and a half years. Take what you like and leave the rest.

The thing is, that general sentiment isn't new to Philadelphians. For decades there has been the general sentiment that Philly was in decline, much the same as how we all felt about Detroit. You don't even have to be familiar with the city to see this... Just look at the wording of the article that I posted!

Of cities that have ever had more than 1 million residents, only two have been continually shrinking in population for almost 60 years: Detroit and Philadelphia. I think that some people on here get confused when we draw comparisons of Detroit against other cities. We all know that for very large cities Detroit is the extreme in terms of decline. We know that. But that doesn't mean we can't draws comparisons between Detroit and others. And if you look at other very large cities that have been on a similar trajectory as Detroit, then Philadelphia is the obvious closest match.

[bailey]

I guess students that went to Wayne State, University of Detroit, Lawrence Tech, Oakland, and the likes can just piss on their degrees before they throw them into the fire then?

Thanks for illustrating the point about willful and strident ignorance. My very, very simple point is not IN ANY WAY about the respective "quality" of anyone's degree, its about the numbers. But, of course, as is par for the course here, you take an objective fact as some sort of personal attack

Let me see if I can slow this down enough....put UofM, MSU, EMU, Oakland and ooh, lets say Grand Valley ACTUALLY INSIDE DETROIT and not 30minutes to 2 HOURS AWAY and add them to the very fine WSU, UofD, CCS....etc and you'd approach the numbers of people, the economic multiplier, and the neighborhood foundation those students, universities, and research institutions that are located PHYSICALLY INSIDE PHILLY provide to Philly. [[lets not even get into the fact that there are 92 colleges and Universities in the Metro Philly area)

My point is that fact [[Philly having a huge knowledge economic driver incorporated in its economy) has a lot..not all..but A LOT to do with why Philly has only lost HALF as many people as Detroit over the same period.

[ghettopalmetto]

Thanks for illustrating the point about willful and strident ignorance. My very, very simple point is not IN ANY WAY about the respective "quality" of anyone's degree, its about the numbers. But, of course, as is par for the course here, you take an objective fact as some sort of personal attack

Let me see if I can slow this down enough....put UofM, MSU, EMU, Oakland and ooh, lets say Grand Valley ACTUALLY INSIDE DETROIT and not 30minutes to 2 HOURS AWAY and add them to the very fine WSU, UofD, CCS....etc and you'd approach the numbers of people, the economic multiplier, and the neighborhood foundation those students, universities, and research institutions that are located PHYSICALLY INSIDE PHILLY provide to Philly. [[lets not even get into the fact that there are 92 colleges and Universities in the Metro Philly area)

My point is that fact [[Philly having a huge knowledge economic driver incorporated in its economy) has a lot..not all..but A LOT to do with why Philly has only lost HALF as many people as Detroit over the same period.

Graduates of Michigan's universities aren't even staying in-state.

I think a lot can be learned through comparisons to Philadelphia. I think the dangerous part, though, is coming up with reason why Detroit "can't" do something. As Mr. Ford once said, "Think you can, think you can't. Either way you'll be right."

What are Detroit's strengths? What are the weaknesses that need to be addressed? What tools are needed to address the weaknesses? If Philadelphia can begin to turn itself around, certainly there is hope for Detroit. So, maybe Southeastern Michigan doesn't have 92 colleges and universities. Does that mean we should all just give up and let the region die?

There is, at present, great opportunity to reinvent Detroit. It could be something vibrant, dynamic, and incredible, or it can plod along day-to-day with terminal illness. Unfortunately, the former option takes a lot of hard work, creativity, and difficult decisions. It all really depends on whether or not Detroit wants to continue with its head-in-the-sand business-as-usual approach.

Maybe City Council and Mr. Bing could take one of those infamous "fact-finding" missions to Philadelphia....

[bailey]

Graduates of Michigan's universities aren't even staying in-state.

I think a lot can be learned through comparisons to Philadelphia. I think the dangerous part, though, is coming up with reason why Detroit "can't" do something. As Mr. Ford once said, "Think you can, think you can't. Either way you'll be right."

What are Detroit's strengths? What are the weaknesses that need to be addressed? What tools are needed to address the weaknesses? If Philadelphia can begin to turn itself around, certainly there is hope for Detroit. So, maybe Southeastern Michigan doesn't have 92 colleges and universities. Does that mean we should all just give up and let the region die?

There is, at present, great opportunity to reinvent Detroit. It could be something vibrant, dynamic, and incredible, or it can plod along day-to-day with terminal illness. Unfortunately, the former option takes a lot of hard work, creativity, and difficult decisions. It all really depends on whether or not Detroit wants to continue with its head-in-the-sand business-as-usual approach.

Maybe City Council and Mr. Bing could take one of those infamous "fact-finding" missions to Philadelphia....

I guess you sort of beg the question; has Philly "turned around" or has it simply reached an equilibrium point after a generation of anti city baby boomers, a generation of steep manufacturing industrial decline, and a generation of sprawl in it's suburbs?

Perhaps that is all we're really seeing there. Philly with a diversified economy, favorable location, historic prominence...etc, has simply found its level. Detroit [[and Michigan too?), with it's reliance on one sector, it's relative isloation, its populations' anti "cities" mentality, and dedication to status quo...simply has not? Maybe Detroit's real equilibrium point is around the half million point?