Yeah. Anyone who talks about how great Detroit is and how it is making a "comeback" is most likely living in either the small portion of the downtown core that has enjoyed some investments recently, or in one of the wealthy gated neighborhoods. They haven't traveled outside those places to see the real Detroit, which consists of rundown and abandoned neighborhoods as far as the eye can see and an incredible amount of poverty that permeates them.
If you insist that Detroit is defined by its failing communities and not by its successful ones then Detroit will always, by definition, be failing. To argue that Detroit is not making a "comeback" you must claim that either the successful areas are not growing or that they will not continue to grow.
Isn't it possible that such a comeback is reflected in small areas at first? That the city isn't going to wake up one morning restored to its former glory?
Comments such as yours (and the parent above it) seem to believe that Detroit is down and must stay down. That any negative in the town anywhere invalidates any positive elsewhere. But that is, of course, nonsense. Indeed, we heard exactly the same sort of noise about New York City in the 80s which, while clearly never hitting anywhere near the bottoms of Detroit, many wrote off as beyond repair, settled into a cesspool of crime and decay.
The "real" Detroit includes an invigorating downtown, growing investments, and an actual tech community. That, too, counts as Detroit, and it doesn't not count simply because you can point to negatives elsewhere.
>>Comments such as yours (and the parent above it) seem to believe that Detroit is down and must stay down.
It's not that it must stay down, but rather that it most likely will. The only reason it was a successful city at one point is manufacturing. Manufacturing has since left, and it's very unlikely that an equally lucrative industry is going to be able to fill the gap.
In general, it's much easier for small towns to become successful cities (as Detroit once did), than for decaying cities to make a comeback (as some people think Detroit will do soon).
Manufacturing has since left, and it's very unlikely that an equally lucrative industry is going to be able to fill the gap.
By this measure, just about every American city is doomed. Except, I suppose, San Francisco, if we accept that every city is "winner takes all" (which it isn't and has never been).
Detroit is a metro area about 4 million strong. It is the gateway for millions of Canadians, and to the Toronto area. It is midway between a number of great cities. It has abundant energy, geological and political stability, limited pests, and so on. It has a very large workforce, and despite the reputation, a very large educated workforce.
I mean some of the commentary in here is just...weird. Someone else commented as if all industry is going to move South, as if winter is a significant economic factor (it isn't) to industry (aside from data centers and cooling, for that matter).
