\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/24/business/distress-cities-counties.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Spin it a little better. Buffalo is the second least distressed city on Lake Erie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Spin it a little better. Buffalo is the second least distressed city on Lake Erie Who taught you geography! Third least distressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Again, as I've said numerous times on the other football side, hey at least were not Cleveland. But weird, a city that has been run by democrats for 2 generations in a state that is as solid blue as you can get, that has some of the highest rates of unionization, is on the top 10 most distressed list. Must be purely coincidence.. But I can honestly say thanks to Pegulas evil frac money we are going in the right direction and in better shape than I can remember in my lifetime. One private citizen did more for this city than 40 years of democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Again, as I've said numerous times on the other football side, hey at least were not Cleveland. But weird, a city that has been run by democrats for 2 generations in a state that is as solid blue as you can get, that has some of the highest rates of unionization, is on the top 10 most distressed list. Must be purely coincidence.. But I can honestly say thanks to Pegulas evil frac money we are going in the right direction and in better shape than I can remember in my lifetime. One private citizen did more for this city than 40 years of democrats. Perhaps you should look at the article...the most distressed counties and states are predominantly GOP run...whereas Buffalo as.a city is "distressed" a primary reason is the unusually small footprint.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Perhaps you should look at the article...the most distressed counties and states are predominantly GOP run...whereas Buffalo as.a city is "distressed" a primary reason is the unusually small footprint.... What does it's footprint have to do with it being distressed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Who taught you geography! Third least distressed. Erie & ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Perhaps you should look at the article...the most distressed counties and states are predominantly GOP run...whereas Buffalo as.a city is "distressed" a primary reason is the unusually small footprint.... I did read the article thanks. All those cities are predominantly democrat strongholds. I am no expert on California politics but san bernadino might be the most conservative city on that list. And they are in Cali so good luck. Memphis is in a red state but is a solid democrat city and probably county too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Erie & ? The list was only major cities and had Toledo and Cleveland more distressed. If you are counting Erie... Then I guess you can spin it as the 4th least distressed. ;-) ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 (edited) The list was only major cities and had Toledo and Cleveland more distressed. If you are counting Erie... Then I guess you can spin it as the 4th least distressed. ;-) ;-) Lol thx for the ray of sunshine. Of you want to throw in a neighboring body of water, lake st. Clair then we have Detroit beat too. Edited February 26, 2016 by drinkTHEkoolaid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Perhaps you should look at the article...the most distressed counties and states are predominantly GOP run...whereas Buffalo as.a city is "distressed" a primary reason is the unusually small footprint.... There are so many layers of wrong in that statement, but why should you ruin your run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Perhaps you should look at the article...the most distressed counties and states are predominantly GOP run...whereas Buffalo as.a city is "distressed" a primary reason is the unusually small footprint.... There are so many layers of wrong in that statement, but why should you ruin your run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I did read the article thanks. All those cities are predominantly democrat strongholds. I am no expert on California politics but san bernadino might be the most conservative city on that list. And they are in Cali so good luck. Memphis is in a red state but is a solid democrat city and probably county too. You think it is all politics? Not geographic location? San Fran & Seattle are liberal, progressive bastions... What about NYC & Boston? Chicago... All not distressed. At least on this list. Of course all have their worts but don't make this dubious list. It's location location location... IMO and what natural resources and climate (yes weather helps or hurts) the town brings to the table that overcomes political leaning... Dream on that political ideology would change the fortunes of a poorly situated city around on a dime. A city that lacks productive natural resources and fails to grow wealth. Anyway... I wonder what would happen if you turned the military complex on it's head and moved it to the distressed locations? But why would you when location is one of the most determining factors in success of that complex in a market? What the hell is a place like BFLo or Cleveland (Ohio/NY) going to have over FLA, Texas, Cali or Virgina? Just keep dreaming it is purely political and the wave of the ideological magic wand would make some areas do a 180 degree about face! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 You think it is all politics? Not geographic location? San Fran & Seattle are liberal, progressive bastions... What about NYC & Boston? Chicago... All not distressed. At least on this list. Of course all have their worts but don't make this dubious list. It's location location location... IMO and what natural resources and climate (yes weather helps or hurts) the town brings to the table that overcomes political leaning... Dream on that political ideology would change the fortunes of a poorly situated city around on a dime. A city that lacks productive natural resources and fails to grow wealth. Anyway... I wonder what would happen if you turned the military complex on it's head and moved it to the distressed locations? But why would you when location is one of the most determining factors in success of that complex in a market? What the hell is a place like BFLo or Cleveland (Ohio/NY) going to have over FLA, Texas, Cali or Virgina? Just keep dreaming it is purely political and the wave of the ideological magic wand would make some areas do a 180 degree about face! Oh, yeah...that was YOU! I was trying to remember which nimrod here argued that geography determined prosperity. I'm also trying to remember which nimrod it was who argued that the quality of life in a city was determined by its skyline. I know it was someone FAR dumber than you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 (edited) Lol thx for the ray of sunshine. Of you want to throw in a neighboring body of water, lake st. Clair then we have Detroit beat too./chuckle... Believe me I had the straits (Detroit) on my radar but simply couldn't shoehorn them onto Lake Erie... ;-) Oh, yeah...that was YOU! I was trying to remember which nimrod here argued that geography determined prosperity. I'm also trying to remember which nimrod it was who argued that the quality of life in a city was determined by its skyline. I know it was someone FAR dumber than you. Nice spin... So you are saying location simply doesn't matter? You should pay more attention to what your real estate agent tells you. Yes... In an earlier time global positioning was a factor in the rise of cities like BFLo... It is that irrelavent position today in the market that hurts it. Of course it is not an absolute killer that it can't overcome, but it weighs it down. Would you put a city where BFLo is today? In today's economy? You'd have to be an absolute nut, if you say yes. Edited February 26, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Any councidence that most of the cities on that list were bygone transportational hubs. Hubs that were absorbed into a more streamlined economy? 5 on The Great Lakes. 2 on the inland. 1 on the east coast absorbed into the NYC market. Their positioning determined where they were to be placed and have since been made irrelevant in a new modern economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Would you put a city where BFLo is today? In today's economy? You'd have to be an absolute nut, if you say yes. Are you kidding? On the border with our largest trading partner, the only crossing within 100 miles? Ready access to plentiful, cheap hydroelectric power? And ready access to water transportation? That's a great location for an inland city...unless you're a complete !@#$ing idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Are you kidding? On the border with our largest trading partner, the only crossing within 100 miles? Ready access to plentiful, cheap hydroelectric power? And ready access to water transportation? That's a great location for an inland city...unless you're a complete !@#$ing idiot. In 1902. That cheap hydro can now be transported over great distances just as cheap. Transportation, there is no reason for break in bulk in BFLo anymore... It's sole reason for originally existing. That 100 miles is irrelevant now than it was in 1902... It can be stretched to much greater and efficient distances even as it avoids the brutal and unpredictable micro-climate. Water transportation is irrelevant and dead end with out the other half of the original equation and primary purpose why BFLo was placed where it is. Now... I am not saying a city shouldn't exist there... But a much smaller and grossly scaled down version... What do yoy do with the past shell of a much greater city? How should that be absorbed and what should absorb it? There should be no grand Anerican city plans for that specific location and for three others on that list... How do you get those grand city notions out of people's heads and throttle back? As a port city... BFLo doesn't even crack into the top 150 in the country and simply never will again or come close. Just maybe... Just maybe that is a major reason it is distressed and other cities like it too: They have outlived their useful purpose. Sorry to be all sunshine! ;-) ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts