Michigan CEO: Soul-Crushing Sprawl Killing Business

Augustiner · March-16-11, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by illwill

Detroit is perfectly fine just the way it is today.

Huh? I mean, I'm plenty happy here, not going anywhere anytime soon, etc., but I'd say this viewpoint puts you in a minority of one.

Originally Posted by illwill

I definitely plan on getting back to the city at some point in the very near future to open a business. I'll still keep my dual residency where i currently live, but I love being in Detroit/Michigan.

Oh, you don't even live here? Well, that explains it, I guess. The grass really is always greener.

**bailey** · March-16-11, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

You don't get it. Read the link in the original post. People HAVE moved to Detroit with their OWN money. They can't make their business work because they simply can't find qualified talent willing to live in Southeast Michigan. It has nothing to do with my opinion as it does companies not being able to make money under the status quo.

I think that statement is as much of a bullshit statement as the letters from the Mackinaw Center about how the tax burden in Michigan is chasing away business. Its a convenient excuse that doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

**Detroitnerd** · March-16-11, 03:46 PM

We're talking about trends and tastes and the economic environment, aren't we? Aren't all of those things in flux right now? Seems that instead of arguing categorically about things, a little nuance would go a long way to defusing this kind of dust-up. Just two cents ... from an unlikely source, I know...

**esp1986** · March-16-11, 05:03 PM

The author of the article is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black, for sure. However he hits the nail right on the head. Not for all of the right reasons though. Sure, it is not easy to recruit top talent in a relatively undesireable location. It is even harder to recruit young talent in an area without a very strong urban core.

Businesses thrive on quantity. The more people a business serves, the better it can do. A business in a dense urban area, will undoubtedly do better than the same business in a suburban area. By doing more business, a company can pay higher wages and higher rent, thus driving property values, as all tenants and property owners can afford more. By continuing to sprawl, property values stay low, as does density, and businesses, especially local ones, don't grow as much. So they can't pay higher wages, and thus property values stagnate.

Being so spread out unquestionably hurts an economy, especially Detroit. Being an autocentric region, with gas prices on the rise, means that everybody spends a significant chunk of their income on gas. The lack of density means that virtually everyplace a person has to go, they have to drive to, often times across town and back. While places like New York and Chicago are able to recruit top talent and young talent, Detroit continues to wonder why this happens. A lot of the problem is about quantity, if the region as a whole were more densely populated, property values and wages would rise proportionately. This is where the mass transit debate comes in, but is another debate entirely.

The rising gas prices will just continue to hurt this region, as more and more young people simply can't afford to pay for gas and rent. The same goes for recruiting experienced workers, as they can make more money elsewhere, and even though the cost of living is less in Detroit, when you factor in the cost of gas, it can add up in a hurry.

**illwill** · March-16-11, 05:07 PM

Hey Augustine,

I admit, when I was in Detroit back in 1998 or so, Detroit WAS NOT the place to be. I was probably one of only 2500 people at the Tiger Games. And after the games, the entire team would walk over to Hockey Town and get hammered. Most people didn't even know who they were. By the way, I bet a lot of you remember those good old days... when Detroit was not commercial and still had that really special Detroit feeling.

But I will admit, it was a VERY depressing place to be, especially for a young person. It lacked a lot of the 24 hour energy that I wanted, and as a young go-getter I needed to be in a heavily-populated and dense urban area to make money for what I was trying to do. To this day, when I leave Downtown proper, I still see Detroit as a very depressing place to live. Very depressing! I wanted to be in a city that had so much to offer, to the point that I'd never run out of things to do. I wanted to have access to public transportation and live in a walkable city.

However, I still love Detroit and mostly everything about it. I also love where I'm living now. I've been lucky enough to make enough money, where I can afford to have homes in both cities and still work for myself.

**iheartthed** · March-16-11, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by illwill

Hey Augustine,

I admit, when I was in Detroit back in 1998 or so, Detroit WAS NOT the place to be. I was probably one of only 2500 people at the Tiger Games. And after the games, the entire team would walk over to Hockey Town and get hammered. Most people didn't even know who they were. By the way, I bet a lot of you remember those good old days... when Detroit was not commercial and still had that really special Detroit feeling.

But I will admit, it was a VERY depressing place to be, especially for a young person. It lacked a lot of the 24 hour energy that I wanted, and as a young go-getter I needed to be in a heavily-populated and dense urban area to make money for what I was trying to do. To this day, when I leave Downtown proper, I still see Detroit as a very depressing place to live. Very depressing! I wanted to be in a city that had so much to offer, to the point that I'd never run out of things to do. I wanted to have access to public transportation and live in a walkable city.

However, I still love Detroit and mostly everything about it. I also love where I'm living now. I've been lucky enough to make enough money, where I can afford to have homes in both cities and still work for myself.

So... You left Detroit to find exactly what the author criticized Detroit for not having. Uh, okay......

**iheartthed** · March-16-11, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by esp1986

Being so spread out unquestionably hurts an economy, especially Detroit. Being an autocentric region, with gas prices on the rise, means that everybody spends a significant chunk of their income on gas. The lack of density means that virtually everyplace a person has to go, they have to drive to, often times across town and back. While places like New York and Chicago are able to recruit top talent and young talent, Detroit continues to wonder why this happens. A lot of the problem is about quantity, if the region as a whole were more densely populated, property values and wages would rise proportionately. This is where the mass transit debate comes in, but is another debate entirely.

I don't think the mass transit debate is a separate debate at all. It dovetails perfectly with why Detroit seems like such an unattractive place. [[And why the land use policies are so warped and out of touch with reality.)

**rondinjp** · March-16-11, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

The pay for patent lawyers doesn't diverge that wildly based on location [[unlike corporate law, which is what bloats the pay stats for the coastal cities). According to simplyhired.com, the average salary for an IP patent attorney in Detroit is $88K/year and $89K/year in New York. In DC and SF the salaries are $102K and $101K, respectively. And in Chicago the average salary is $83K/year.

Trust me, these numbers are incorrect for every city mentioned. Including Detroit, and especially NYC.