<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Detroit: Not the Future of the American City</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/</link>
	<description>Passionate About Cities</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:28:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2989</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2989</guid>
		<description>I think cause #1 is far more important. Cause #2 exists also in Atlanta, whose metro area has an abnormally low density even by US standards, as well as less concentration of density in its core. Atlanta proper suffered similar population decline in the 1970s to the Northeastern cities, and took until 2007 to recover to its 1970 population peak. On top of that, Georgia counties are very small, leading to fractionalized governments, with the same racial divides between the black inner city and its white suburbs as in Detroit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think cause #1 is far more important. Cause #2 exists also in Atlanta, whose metro area has an abnormally low density even by US standards, as well as less concentration of density in its core. Atlanta proper suffered similar population decline in the 1970s to the Northeastern cities, and took until 2007 to recover to its 1970 population peak. On top of that, Georgia counties are very small, leading to fractionalized governments, with the same racial divides between the black inner city and its white suburbs as in Detroit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2985</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2985</guid>
		<description>I think the causes of Detroit&#039;s decline can be boiled down to 2 main causes:&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;1) Single industry dominance of the auto industry. As someone noted, when the auto industry was king, it helped smooth over a lot of problems that afflicted Detroit. Now that it&#039;s near collapse, there&#039;s nothing left to prop up Detroit. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;2) 50 years of suburban sprawl. Detroit&#039;s been sprawling outwards for years, matched by the decline in the city&#039;s population. The metro area doesn&#039;t lack for wealth, it&#039;s just been disbursed across multiple counties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the causes of Detroit&#8217;s decline can be boiled down to 2 main causes:</p>
<p>1) Single industry dominance of the auto industry. As someone noted, when the auto industry was king, it helped smooth over a lot of problems that afflicted Detroit. Now that it&#8217;s near collapse, there&#8217;s nothing left to prop up Detroit. </p>
<p>2) 50 years of suburban sprawl. Detroit&#8217;s been sprawling outwards for years, matched by the decline in the city&#8217;s population. The metro area doesn&#8217;t lack for wealth, it&#8217;s just been disbursed across multiple counties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2976</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2976</guid>
		<description>People need to get around, but they don&#039;t need $15,000 cars for it. The problems of the auto industry, especially the first world auto industry, are manifold, and probably irreversible.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;1. First world markets are nearing saturation. Because today&#039;s cars are better than yesterday&#039;s, they last longer - in the US, it&#039;s twice as long as 20 years ago. This means fewer sales per year.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;2. Automation means that the auto industry is less labor-intensive. The cost savings are passed along to the consumer, who enjoys real declines in car prices.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;3. Conversely, rising oil prices are making it less economic to own a car. The current oil glut is temporary, and GM is expecting $130/barrel oil and $4/gallon gas to be back by 2013.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;4. There are smaller returns to scale than there used to be: unlike in the 1950s, there&#039;s no inherent reason to keep all factories in one place. This makes it easier to offshore. Why pay $70/hour to workers in Detroit or even $45/hour in Huntsville, when you can pay $8/hour in Guangzhou?&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;5. Third world markets are growing too slowly. To the extent that they&#039;re growing, global warming concerns are causing India and China to spend their resources on building mass transit, not highways. Cities in those countries are trying to look more like Hong Kong and Singapore than like Los Angeles and Houston.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People need to get around, but they don&#8217;t need $15,000 cars for it. The problems of the auto industry, especially the first world auto industry, are manifold, and probably irreversible.</p>
<p>1. First world markets are nearing saturation. Because today&#8217;s cars are better than yesterday&#8217;s, they last longer &#8211; in the US, it&#8217;s twice as long as 20 years ago. This means fewer sales per year.</p>
<p>2. Automation means that the auto industry is less labor-intensive. The cost savings are passed along to the consumer, who enjoys real declines in car prices.</p>
<p>3. Conversely, rising oil prices are making it less economic to own a car. The current oil glut is temporary, and GM is expecting $130/barrel oil and $4/gallon gas to be back by 2013.</p>
<p>4. There are smaller returns to scale than there used to be: unlike in the 1950s, there&#8217;s no inherent reason to keep all factories in one place. This makes it easier to offshore. Why pay $70/hour to workers in Detroit or even $45/hour in Huntsville, when you can pay $8/hour in Guangzhou?</p>
<p>5. Third world markets are growing too slowly. To the extent that they&#8217;re growing, global warming concerns are causing India and China to spend their resources on building mass transit, not highways. Cities in those countries are trying to look more like Hong Kong and Singapore than like Los Angeles and Houston.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JG</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2974</link>
		<dc:creator>JG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2974</guid>
		<description>Thundermutt - Thanks for the info regarding automaker attempts to diversify their industry.  It&#039;s too bad they were not successful - and I suspect this would be a bad time to attempt anything of the such. But maybe not, too complicated for me to comment further.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Anon 2:29 - Good idea for INDY. I think there is already exist a large number of companies associated with racing and race tech around the area (not an area I know too much about.) But I do like the idea of INDY becoming the auto technology capital of the U.S.  Being between Detroit and Ken/Tenn (with foreign auto manufacturing) could make this doable.  For example attracting auto tech start-ups (e.g. high performance hybrid engine design, other components for racing or merely personal cars) to the area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thundermutt &#8211; Thanks for the info regarding automaker attempts to diversify their industry.  It&#8217;s too bad they were not successful &#8211; and I suspect this would be a bad time to attempt anything of the such. But maybe not, too complicated for me to comment further.</p>
<p>Anon 2:29 &#8211; Good idea for INDY. I think there is already exist a large number of companies associated with racing and race tech around the area (not an area I know too much about.) But I do like the idea of INDY becoming the auto technology capital of the U.S.  Being between Detroit and Ken/Tenn (with foreign auto manufacturing) could make this doable.  For example attracting auto tech start-ups (e.g. high performance hybrid engine design, other components for racing or merely personal cars) to the area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2972</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2972</guid>
		<description>Anon 10:03&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I neither missed his point nor twisted his remarks.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Some on this board make rather sweeping statements that are not based on reality.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;The auto industry is the 2nd largest industry in the world and is likely to remain so until you are able to &#039;beam yourself&#039; to another location.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;In case you forget, much of Indy and its environs owe much to the auto industry...at one point Indy actually rivaled Detroit in the manufacture of automobiles.  Am not quite sure how/why that mantle eventually passed to Detroit but it did.  The Indy 500 is also a symbol of the importance the auto industry played in Indy&#039;s history.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Might suggest that Indy figure out how to capitalize on its historic ties to the auto industry instead of focusing on what some consider future growth (with high risk and lots of competition) where its resources/location etc may not be an advantage.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Sbarkfully - anon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anon 10:03</p>
<p>I neither missed his point nor twisted his remarks.  </p>
<p>Some on this board make rather sweeping statements that are not based on reality.</p>
<p>The auto industry is the 2nd largest industry in the world and is likely to remain so until you are able to &#8216;beam yourself&#8217; to another location.  </p>
<p>In case you forget, much of Indy and its environs owe much to the auto industry&#8230;at one point Indy actually rivaled Detroit in the manufacture of automobiles.  Am not quite sure how/why that mantle eventually passed to Detroit but it did.  The Indy 500 is also a symbol of the importance the auto industry played in Indy&#8217;s history.</p>
<p>Might suggest that Indy figure out how to capitalize on its historic ties to the auto industry instead of focusing on what some consider future growth (with high risk and lots of competition) where its resources/location etc may not be an advantage.</p>
<p>Sbarkfully &#8211; anon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thundermutt</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2971</link>
		<dc:creator>thundermutt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2971</guid>
		<description>clarification:  GE bought RCA in 1986.  I meant to say that RCA was an example of the failed multicompanies of the 70&#039;s, which made it ripe for a GE takeover.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;In addition, GE later merged its aerospace division into Martin Marietta...another divestiture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>clarification:  GE bought RCA in 1986.  I meant to say that RCA was an example of the failed multicompanies of the 70&#8217;s, which made it ripe for a GE takeover.</p>
<p>In addition, GE later merged its aerospace division into Martin Marietta&#8230;another divestiture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thundermutt</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2970</link>
		<dc:creator>thundermutt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2970</guid>
		<description>JG, all of the big three did have some diversified manufacturing assets.  Their record isn&#039;t good.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;GM built diesel-electric locomotives in its Electro-Motive Division, and once owned Hughes Electronics (a defense contractor), EDS (they bought it from Ross Perot), and GMAC (consumer lending).  Ford once owned Philco-Ford, a consumer electronics brand, and built the renowned Ford Trimotor airplane.  I think Chrysler had an aerospace division as well, but I&#039;m a bit fuzzy there.  The old American Motors AM General division built tanks, trucks, and Hummers for the military (can&#039;t remember if it was spun off before Chrysler bought AMC or after).&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;GE is one of the FEW success stories in US industrial diversification, mainly because they periodically turn over their portfolio of businesses.  They bought RCA, one of the failed examples of multi-companies in the 1970s (records, NBC, tv&#039;s, semiconductors, space/satellites), kept NBC and satellites and got rid of the rest.  They sold their small-appliance business to Black &amp; Decker, plastics division to the Saudis, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JG, all of the big three did have some diversified manufacturing assets.  Their record isn&#39;t good.  </p>
<p>GM built diesel-electric locomotives in its Electro-Motive Division, and once owned Hughes Electronics (a defense contractor), EDS (they bought it from Ross Perot), and GMAC (consumer lending).  Ford once owned Philco-Ford, a consumer electronics brand, and built the renowned Ford Trimotor airplane.  I think Chrysler had an aerospace division as well, but I&#39;m a bit fuzzy there.  The old American Motors AM General division built tanks, trucks, and Hummers for the military (can&#39;t remember if it was spun off before Chrysler bought AMC or after).</p>
<p>GE is one of the FEW success stories in US industrial diversification, mainly because they periodically turn over their portfolio of businesses.  They bought RCA, one of the failed examples of multi-companies in the 1970s (records, NBC, tv&#39;s, semiconductors, space/satellites), kept NBC and satellites and got rid of the rest.  They sold their small-appliance business to Black &amp; Decker, plastics division to the Saudis, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JG</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2969</link>
		<dc:creator>JG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2969</guid>
		<description>One last comment on Detroit industry.  Once GM, Chrysler, and Ford are able to reorganize and the economy improves, does anyone think it would be wise for them to diversify into manufacturing goods in addition to cars? Use GE as an example in that they make everything from light bulbs to CT scanners to diesel engine trains to owning NBC Universal.  I think this could help a company like GM whether future changes in the auto industry.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I say this with caution because I would hate to see already struggling companies move into charted waters; but wonder if in a number of years why GM or Ford couldn&#039;t put themselves in a position to manufacture components for HS rail, wind turbines, etc. Certainly this could improve the Detroit economic base.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One last comment on Detroit industry.  Once GM, Chrysler, and Ford are able to reorganize and the economy improves, does anyone think it would be wise for them to diversify into manufacturing goods in addition to cars? Use GE as an example in that they make everything from light bulbs to CT scanners to diesel engine trains to owning NBC Universal.  I think this could help a company like GM whether future changes in the auto industry.</p>
<p>I say this with caution because I would hate to see already struggling companies move into charted waters; but wonder if in a number of years why GM or Ford couldn&#8217;t put themselves in a position to manufacture components for HS rail, wind turbines, etc. Certainly this could improve the Detroit economic base.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2968</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2968</guid>
		<description>Anonymous, in your attempt to make a snarky remark to Alon, you revealed your own ignorance and pettiness.  He did NOT state or imply that one needs a graduate degree to work in the textile industry.  He was stating that many of the rapidly growing industries today, often DO require graduate degrees, which is true.  As for his mentioning the textile industry.  You missed his point entirely.  He used the example of New England textile manufacturing towns to illustrate that it is economic folly for any region to focus solely on anyone main industry simply because it is the big industry of that time period.  As Alon points out, what is the dominant industry today, may not be the dominant industry tomorrow, and any region would do well to balance industry consolidation with encouraging innovation and supporting emerging industries&#039; growth.  Either you misread his remarks or you purposely tried to twist his meaning in order to make your silly and snarky remark.  Either way, it does not reflect well on you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anonymous, in your attempt to make a snarky remark to Alon, you revealed your own ignorance and pettiness.  He did NOT state or imply that one needs a graduate degree to work in the textile industry.  He was stating that many of the rapidly growing industries today, often DO require graduate degrees, which is true.  As for his mentioning the textile industry.  You missed his point entirely.  He used the example of New England textile manufacturing towns to illustrate that it is economic folly for any region to focus solely on anyone main industry simply because it is the big industry of that time period.  As Alon points out, what is the dominant industry today, may not be the dominant industry tomorrow, and any region would do well to balance industry consolidation with encouraging innovation and supporting emerging industries&#8217; growth.  Either you misread his remarks or you purposely tried to twist his meaning in order to make your silly and snarky remark.  Either way, it does not reflect well on you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/comment-page-1/#comment-2965</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arenn.com/blog/2009/03/14/detroit-not-the-future-of-the-american-city/#comment-2965</guid>
		<description>Gentle reader Alon:  you said &quot;Probably something you need a graduate degree for&quot;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I am quite sure the garment industry had very few graduate degrees in its hey-day.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;If you view the world thru the lens of Michael Moore and Monty Python, I fear the money spent on your graduate degree wudst been better spent...perhaps the publishing world ye are more suited</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gentle reader Alon:  you said &#8220;Probably something you need a graduate degree for&#8221;</p>
<p>I am quite sure the garment industry had very few graduate degrees in its hey-day.</p>
<p>If you view the world thru the lens of Michael Moore and Monty Python, I fear the money spent on your graduate degree wudst been better spent&#8230;perhaps the publishing world ye are more suited</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

