Such is life in Black-Run America (BRA), where the city of Philadelphia is well on its way to be the next Detroit.
Well on its way.
|Philly went from 80 percent white in 1950, to 36.9 percent white in 2013; Detroit went from 83 percent white in 1950, to 8 percent white in 2013|
Back in 1950, fresh off the victory over the Axis Powers, Detroit boasted a population of nearly 2 million people (83 percent of whom were white); Philadelphia's population was at 2.1 million, with more than 80 percent being white.
Today, Detroit is 82 percent black and bankrupt; today, Philadelphia is 44.3 percent black, when in 1990, it was 39.3 percent black.
Both cities have seen massive white flight, precisely for the strange reason/dichotomy mentioned above: white people aren't supposed to notice black criminality, and they definitely aren't supposed to voice opposition to it.
Detroit is bankrupt - will Philadelphia follow? Should our city pursue the solutions currently in vogue, or do we look for other approaches? My view is that if you have a brain tumor, you don't get relief by treating the headache it causes, since you will still die from the cancer. Failing to address the underlying causes of the financial problems will only lay the foundation for the next failure. So, why did Detroit fail? The explanations are many but you have to start with the simple fact that older, industrial cities were caught in a tsunami of change triggered by automobiles, highways, and technological innovation.
The suburbanization of households and manufacturing was the death knell of traditional city economies. The result was a massive depopulation of cities in the Northeast and Midwest. In some ways, Philadelphia is like Detroit.
Both had thriving manufacturing sectors that disappeared. Both suffered huge outflows of households to the suburbs. Philadelphia, once the nation's third-largest city, has lost 25 percent of its population and is now the fifth-largest city. Detroit lost more than 40 percent of its residents and is now just the 18th largest.
The negative impact of the massive thinning of the population on the cost of government has not been recognized. Detroit was built to hold more than two million people. It is down to 700,000. Similarly, Philadelphia could house 2.5 million people, but the population is roughly 1.5 million. Despite this loss of taxpayers and businesses, neither Detroit nor Philadelphia - nor other similar cities - adapted its government or land-use pattern to the smaller population.
That failure is the root cause of the financial problems facing Detroit and those Philadelphia is dealing with, as well.
Lower city densities mean higher service costs. Even if only half the number of homes on a block are occupied, the city still must provide services. A police car must patrol the streets.
Trash collection and snow removal still have to occur.
Fires still need to be put out. The significantly smaller population requires services whose costs are not proportionally lower, driving up government expenditures dramatically. If cities do not return to their roots as high-density locations, they will continue to stumble from one financial crisis to another. Cities cannot afford to have few people living in large areas. Services cost too much.
It wastes land and exiles residents to dangerous neighborhoods, which businesses avoid. It prevents employing the land for more productive purposes. What is needed is a "clear-cut" approach to land use: Areas should be totally depopulated and the land banked. If large tracts of land can be amassed, commercial and industrial business can be attracted. To accumulate that space, properties may have to be sold to the city, development corporations, or private investors, or taken through eminent domain. The suburbs, with their large open spaces, created industrial parks.
Cities must do the same. Some land will also be available for parks or other public uses. Unfortunately, this is a harsh solution with huge human costs. People must be relocated, hopefully to better areas with improved housing. Indeed, new housing must be developed first so the receiving neighborhoods are more desirable alternatives.
Though "clear-cutting" increases density, most of those relocated will be poor, who have little other than their homes. And let's face it - there is a racial component to this. This reminds people of urban renewal, which was nicknamed "black removal." That makes it difficult to even consider such a policy, let alone implement it.Yes, let's bemoan "black removal" but continue to sacrifice city after city, passing on the costs of failed municipalities (like 82 percent black Detroit) to the taxpayers to bailout.
Let's watch as major cities become havens for black criminality, but when anyone dares try and start a conversation about race, the elected black officials shout them down and threaten to send them to the Human Rights Commission for 'reprogramming'.
It's the central tenet of life, disregarded to the detriment of all.
Detroit is a story that magnifies this maxim, and Philadelphia is well on its way to being just another case study in the failure of egalitarian, race-neutral (color-blind) thinking.
The Philadelphia Research Initiative (funded by the Pew Charitable Trust) commissioned a study entitled A City Transformed: The Racial and Ethnic Changes in Philadelphia Over the Last 20 Years. Published on June 1, 2011, the most important portion of the study read:
Over the course of two decades, the white population of Philadelphia fell by 263,254 or 31.9 per- cent. Whites went from being 52.1 percent of the city’s population in 1990 to 36.9 percent in 2010. More of the drop (181,444) occurred in the 1990s than in the 2000s (81,810).
In 1990, Philadelphia was a city understood largely in terms of white and black. At the time, it was a majority-white city with a large black minority and small groups of Hispanics and Asians. Two de- cades later, it is a plurality-black city with a large but dwindling white minority and rapidly expand- ing contingents of Hispanics and Asians.
What makes the magnitude of the citywide decline in the white population all the more striking is that it happened even as whites were becoming substantially more numerous in the central part of Philadelphia—Center City and nearby neighborhoods, 11 zip codes in all.
We already know the Center City cannot hold.
Philadelphia is the next Detroit.
Were you to somehow go back in time, show pictures of Philadelphia and Detroit circa 2013 to the soldiers fighting in the Pacific and European Theater during 1943, the American troops would have a hard time being convinced the Allies won World World II.
That the Arsenal of Democracy is now the Abattoir of Democracy, with the unmentionable aspect of the extreme racial demographic change in Detroit being the number one reason for Detroit's decline, well, it's difficult to say what exactly those American troops were fighting to preserve.