Who's Mike Wilkinson, and what's up with his snide take on Detroit's population loss?

[Carey]

Iheart: I didn't say anything about a statewide audience. I mentioned Monroe to Port Huron as a way to describe the vast region of SE Michigan that the Detroit papers focus on. My point, again, is the Detroit News writes for a broad audience, not people like those of us on this forum, who follow the micro news of metro Detroit, such as census trends. His aim in the article is pretty clear: What is Detroit's population going to be? That's clearly a question of broad interest. But I also think you are right: He should have devoted a sentence to the census data on Michigan's loss.That seems germane. I'll make my main points again: It was a legitimate article that wasn't done in a snarky way. And the Detroit papers, while declining in many ways, don't pick on Detroit. In fact, they both publish a lot of positive stories.

[sumas]

I went into a neighborhood mini city hall during census. The lady at a census table was thrilled we had sent ours in already. Got hugs kisses and snagged two T shirts. Sorry people Detroit is really vastly under counted. We have our increasing urban prairies but way more folk are here than people think.

Then of course there are renters young and old that use Mom and Pop addresses for car insurance purposes. They don't let themselves get counted either. Afraid they will get caught in their lies.

Sigh!

[dookie joe]

Like it or not, Detroit is always going to be the focus of the story, because Detroit is the focal point of the region.

Yeah, the 'burbs are declining, too, but not as dramatically as in Detroit and without the same potentially dire consequences. Despite all the stupid slogans, Detroit is teetering on the brink of disaster. Yeah, many 'burbs are in trouble, too. But, again, it's not as dramatic as what's happening in Detroit. And stories are always going to accentuate the dramatic. That's what makes for a good story.

If Roseville's population declines to the point where they have to close their municipal pool, that's not as dramatic as Detroit's dire situation, where ambulances, fire trucks and police cars already don't have proper equipment; where street lights already don't work; where crooked politicians have picked the bones almost completely clean.

I wish Detroiters would quit being so goddamned sensitive about what's said about this city. That goes for those who whine at every perceived slight, or cry over Chrysler commercials. Seriously.

[illwill]

I have to admit, I never did understand the whole crying over the chrysler commercial...

[Islandman]

I'm trying really hard to see the problem with this article, but I'm not seeing it.

[NorthEndere]

I went into a neighborhood mini city hall during census. The lady at a census table was thrilled we had sent ours in already. Got hugs kisses and snagged two T shirts. Sorry people Detroit is really vastly under counted. We have our increasing urban prairies but way more folk are here than people think.

Then of course there are renters young and old that use Mom and Pop addresses for car insurance purposes. They don't let themselves get counted either. Afraid they will get caught in their lies.

Sigh!

Despite knowing how incredibly important the Census is, Detroit still had an ultimate response rate that was one of the lowest in the nation for a big city [[if not the lowest), and a rate that wasn't any better than the last Census in 2000, in fact, it was worse [[70% in 2000 and 64% in 2010).

Meanwhile, just to the north and west, some of Detroit's megaburbs [[Livonia, Sterling Heights, and Warren) had some of the highest mail-in rates of any cities in the nation. In fact, neighboring Livonia had THE highest mail-in response rate of any city over 100,000 in the nation with 88% of their residents mailing back in their responses.

So, when I hear all of this bullsh%t conspiracy about Detroit being overcounted, I have to laugh. Detroiters had to practically be begged to be found, and you better believe that thousands of them weren't found because they didn't want to be.

[iheartthed]

Like it or not, Detroit is always going to be the focus of the story, because Detroit is the focal point of the region.

Yeah, the 'burbs are declining, too, but not as dramatically as in Detroit and without the same potentially dire consequences. Despite all the stupid slogans, Detroit is teetering on the brink of disaster. Yeah, many 'burbs are in trouble, too. But, again, it's not as dramatic as what's happening in Detroit. And stories are always going to accentuate the dramatic. That's what makes for a good story.

If Roseville's population declines to the point where they have to close their municipal pool, that's not as dramatic as Detroit's dire situation, where ambulances, fire trucks and police cars already don't have proper equipment; where street lights already don't work; where crooked politicians have picked the bones almost completely clean.

I wish Detroiters would quit being so goddamned sensitive about what's said about this city. That goes for those who whine at every perceived slight, or cry over Chrysler commercials. Seriously.

Are the suburbs declining for a reason unrelated to why the city is declining?

[mwilbert]

Are the suburbs declining for a reason unrelated to why the city is declining?

I think it depends on the suburb. Some suburbs are declining because of local flight, just like Detroit. Some suburbs are declining because of regional flight, which isn't Detroit's main problem. Of course the two are linked.

[BrushStart]

I think it depends on the suburb. Some suburbs are declining because of local flight, just like Detroit. Some suburbs are declining because of regional flight, which isn't Detroit's main problem. Of course the two are linked.

It's also fair to say that any suburb posting gains is gaining because of Detroit. The only migration going on in the suburbs from outside the region is outward. The suburbs cannot attract anyone from anywhere except the City of Detroit. They're fools if they call that winning.

[NorthEndere]

It's also fair to say that any suburb posting gains is gaining because of Detroit. The only migration going on in the suburbs from outside the region is outward. The suburbs cannot attract anyone from anywhere except the City of Detroit. They're fools if they call that winning.

That's only partially true. The only net suburban in-migration is coming from Detroit and other suburbs. You have former Detroiters becoming Warrentines, former Warranites becoming Sterling Heighters, former Sterling Heights making their way into Macomb and Washington Townships, etc...and a helluva lot of loss to other states the further you move up this ladder.

Ultimately, it is all related, though, with the fact being that metro Detroit has been posting a net out-migration for years, though, the suburbs have either denied this or didn't even acknowledge it, at all. For at least the last 20-30 years Metro Detroit has only posted net growth due to immigration and relatively high birthrates. This is actually true of a lot of metropolitan areas, believe it or not.

[bartock]

It's also fair to say that any suburb posting gains is gaining because of Detroit. The only migration going on in the suburbs from outside the region is outward. The suburbs cannot attract anyone from anywhere except the City of Detroit. They're fools if they call that winning.

Who is calling this winning? Where in the article does it say that?

Then, above, I see dookie joe say this:

"I wish Detroiters would quit being so goddamned sensitive about what's said about this city. That goes for those who whine at every perceived slight, or cry over Chrysler commercials. Seriously."

and the response is this:

"Are the suburbs declining for a reason unrelated to why the city is declining?"

What does one statement have to do with the other? Nobody is gloating, nobody is winning, DPole was right earlier. The point is why the hypersensitivity. I think the article suggests very clearly where the suburb population shift is coming from. Here is what it says:

"What the data will likely reveal is an update on a well-worn path to the suburbs. Decades after mostly white residents flowed out of Detroit and into the suburbs, tens of thousands of African-Americans followed them in greater numbers than before, to places like Southfield, Oak Park and western Oakland County.
In the 2000s, the migration shifted east, to Macomb County.
African-Americans, many from Detroit, made the move, taking advantage of housing costs lowered by the foreclosure crisis and the weakened economy."

He says later, referring to Kurt Metzger:

For many, the decision to uproot and move was based on the simplest things, Metzger said. "You feel safer, you get better services, you get better access to food, to employment," he said.

There is nothing untrue about that statement, and it hardly suggests that the burbs are Shangri-Lai.

So I'm spraying all over here, but those who point out that the article does not address Michigan being the only state in population decline were not reading the headlines when state data was released several weeks ago. Also, the idea that because Detroiter's only returned 65% of their census forms means that it is likely undercounted is absurd. If you know what percentage of people returned their forms, you have a pretty good idea of what the actual number is [[and that 65% was before the door to door started).

Eh...Bah!!

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110321/...#ixzz1HKpbmvNm
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110321/...nsus-to-reveal

[casscorridor]

Black people are moving to the suburbs at a rapid pace, some readers might not realize that. But what this article ignores is the fact that this trend will cause further disintegration of the urban core of the region, leading toward a furthur decline of metro Detroit as a region and Michigan as a state. Economic, social and cultural decline. A cultural black hole, a place where new ideas go to die, and old ideas keep getting regurgitated. We are becoming a region where no one wants to live if they don't have to. Remember that blacks are moving to Atlanta and other southern cities and young whites are moving to NYC, Chicago and other vibrant cities with economic and cultural vibrancy. People move to the suburbs for a last ditch effort to stay near their families, but once a critical mass of family/friends move out of Michigan and/or no job can be found, they will move out of the state entirely. This is wayyyyy more than an issue of Detroit proper, this is a regional, state-wide issue that must be solved accordingly. Unfortunatly, metro Detroits and Michigans leaders have zero intention of taking the steps neccesary to turn the ship around. They are indeed runing the ship straight into a brick wall.

[iheartthed]

Who is calling this winning? Where in the article does it say that?

Then, above, I see dookie joe say this:

"I wish Detroiters would quit being so goddamned sensitive about what's said about this city. That goes for those who whine at every perceived slight, or cry over Chrysler commercials. Seriously."

and the response is this:

"Are the suburbs declining for a reason unrelated to why the city is declining?"

What does one statement have to do with the other? Nobody is gloating, nobody is winning, DPole was right earlier. The point is why the hypersensitivity. I think the article suggests very clearly where the suburb population shift is coming from. Here is what it says:

"What the data will likely reveal is an update on a well-worn path to the suburbs. Decades after mostly white residents flowed out of Detroit and into the suburbs, tens of thousands of African-Americans followed them in greater numbers than before, to places like Southfield, Oak Park and western Oakland County.
In the 2000s, the migration shifted east, to Macomb County.
African-Americans, many from Detroit, made the move, taking advantage of housing costs lowered by the foreclosure crisis and the weakened economy."

He says later, referring to Kurt Metzger:

For many, the decision to uproot and move was based on the simplest things, Metzger said. "You feel safer, you get better services, you get better access to food, to employment," he said.

There is nothing untrue about that statement, and it hardly suggests that the burbs are Shangri-Lai.

So I'm spraying all over here, but those who point out that the article does not address Michigan being the only state in population decline were not reading the headlines when state data was released several weeks ago. Also, the idea that because Detroiter's only returned 65% of their census forms means that it is likely undercounted is absurd. If you know what percentage of people returned their forms, you have a pretty good idea of what the actual number is [[and that 65% was before the door to door started).

Eh...Bah!!

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110321/...#ixzz1HKpbmvNm
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110321/...nsus-to-reveal

Haha, how come dookie joe gets cited by name and my comment is sourced as unnamed?

[iheartthed]

This is how the Detroit News should have written the article: http://www.freep.com/article/2011032...text|FRONTPAGE

[Detroitnerd]

Yes, it should be a chance to examine what's happened, and should likely be a wake-up call for all of us, not just "Detroiters."

[bartock]

Haha, how come dookie joe gets cited by name and my comment is sourced as unnamed?

I said overly sensitive and just assumed...



No, seriously, we just disagree on about everything and I didn't want you to think it was personal.

[BrushStart]

This is how the Detroit News should have written the article: http://www.freep.com/article/2011032...text|FRONTPAGE

Yes. Thank you John Wisely for not being an obnoxious troll like your brother at the News. The data is important to understanding where we go from here. It's not an indictment that Detroit is dying. In fact, the city is not dying, it's actually rebuilding. I don't believe the overall population of the city even matters much if the population of the city's core continues to grow and land continues to be redeveloped in a sensible way.

[BrushStart]

Who is calling this winning? Where in the article does it say that?

It's as much about what Wilkinson said as what he didn't say. Journalists like Wilkinson are professional writers, and some might call me a seasoned reader. When I read something in its totality and walk away with that sour taste in my mouth, I know where the writer stands and the impression he is trying to make. Quite frankly, I don't give a rats ass about how other journalists treat their host cities. I'm a Detroiter who patronizes Wilkinson's paper [[the Detroit News), and I'm sick of writers like Wilkinson putting his finger in my eye, pouring salt in wounds that are trying to heal, and covering only half the story.