The gods will not save you

I'm going to go against all my 'positivity' from Monday's post. I hope you heeded my advice.

At any rate, I found an interesting story from another person trying to fix up my hometown of Pittsburgh, PA. This is another example of an artist working to save his or her hometown. I love the arts, I really do, despite my deconstructionist tendencies which say that art is 'decadent' and self-serving. I think the arts, in particular the public arts, are valuable resources of any healthy democracy. So in one sense I commend the gentleman in this article who is working to change Pittsburgh through the arts. Yet at the same time, I caution those who think that ART will change a city in decline. It is as weak of an argument as the one claiming that stadiums and convention centers will 'revitalize' a city. The arts are cool and even necessary, but will not save us. People in dead-end neighborhoods with high unemployment and the other associated problems need one thing, jobs! You can have all the art in the world, but it is worthless without gainfully employed individuals to enjoy it.

Please tell me a city that is defined by art? Perhaps in the distant past a city or 3 could eek out an existence as manufacturers of a particular craft or form of artwork. Maybe an city in the Renaissance existed solely to produce violins or something. But this was a niche and used for export. The problem with America is that we don't make anything, and you can fill as many offices as you want with 'high-tech' workers and coffee shop programmers and boutique clothing store operators and what not, but you will never replace manufacturing jobs. People say our economy 'advanced'. Did it? Or did those jobs just move elsewhere and people were left behind? It isn't like our world isn't manufacturing things anymore, we still buy cars and clothes and tvs, but that stuff is made in China or Mexico or wherever else the cheapest wages and environmental standards are at the moment.

So back to art. If a city isn't making anything (which few American cities are) then it is successful by at least managing the money used to make stuff. This is one reason artists are in NYC or LA or SF. Those cities are big into the arts because they are huge population centers because they once MADE STUFF (yes, even LA!--it beat out Detroit's manufacturing prowess in the 50s!) and those cities now have enough money to manage investments elsewhere, and the money made can then be used to buy art.

My long winded point is this, good luck to you who try and save the city through art or nightclubs, or a dining scene. Unfortunately, that is all window dressing. If you don't have good jobs to employ people who will waste their leisure time and money on those things, then the city falls. And fall it will. I love vibrant cities with entertainment and clean streets, but I also like places with an employed population. I would rather we all have jobs in some boring city than 10% of us living it up in the artist district while the rest of the city sinks in poverty. Enjoy America as it crumbles and becomes irrelevant and I guess use art to save someone because the other options (drugs, gangs, boredom) are far worse. But remember, you can't save your city, though you might be able to save each other.

BTW, if I haven't destroyed all your hope, here is the article that started this
http://americancity.org/article.php?id_article=318

MSA fun

Anyone who knows me knows that I am constantly beating on Pittsburgh, complaining about the city’s inability to attract jobs or people. Now this isn’t just the city of Pittsburgh, but the 7 County Pittsburgh Metropolitan area. The 7 County region is losing people AND jobs, yes the suburbs! You’ve all heard the news that, “Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis have lost half their population since 1950”. Sure, so has Pittsburgh. But Detroit and others have grown a lot outside of their urban borders, regionally, creating new jobs and keeping many people around. Not Pittsburgh. In fact the Pittsburgh region appears to be the only place, besides Buffalo, to be losing people and jobs among the top 50 MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) in the country.

It is alarming to see that Pittsburgh is still ranked 21st out of the Top 50 MSAs. But the scary thing is to see that it is dead last among population growth since 1950! I really wish things would change for the 'Burgh, but I am not always the most optimistic.

The good thing about charts like this is that they allow ‘growing’ cities like Phoenix, which recently claimed to be the 5^th largest city, to actually be ranked 13^th largest regionally. The reason this is important is that Philadelphia and other Northeastern and Midwestern cities are surrounded by a zillion municipalities that limit annexation and cities like Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, and Chicago are stuck at the same size as 100 years ago. Meanwhile Sunbelt towns like Phoenix and Dallas were able to annex the wastelands around them, anticipating and capturing growth. Thus the CITY of Phoenix may have more bodies than the CITY of Philadelphia. But city limits are rather irrelevant for the economic and social vibrancy of a region. People in Philly work and shop and play and live in Philly as well as in the many surrounding towns and suburbs, as they do in any metropolitan area. Therefore the city population is irrelevant in urban rankings, but MSA statistics are valuable to see how big a metro area is. So Phoenix, you’re not yet in the top 10, let alone top 5! Even if you get there time isn't on your side, how many people can the desert sustain?

For more fun please check out www.demographia.com/ to see more demographic info. Ignore all the 'death of the American Dream b/c of Smart Growth' hype, and read the MSA since 1950s info.

Why I love the East Side

I need to fill this blog with something. My mind is melted and I have nothing to say. Someone recently thought I was in Philly or Perth or Pensacola. I am from and going to soon visit Pittsburgh. But, for the record, I am still in Mil-town with no plans to leave shortly. I talked to an artist last night whom has traveled the world and lived in such diverse locales as NYC and Santa Fe and he said the East Side of Milwaukee is one of the best places-better than even Santa Monica! As much as I hate a large portion of my life, it is hard to argue with him whilst sitting at Alterra on the Lake during a pleasant evening in mid-June. The East Side of Milwaukee is amazing and I'm glad I live here and found out about this gem. Why is the East Side so good?

It's walkable: I can walk to about 20 bars (or more), 4 grocery stores (not including Italian grocers and specialty shops), probably 4 cafes, 10 restaurants, a hardware store, the Lake, music shops, art stores, a few decent venues, on and on and on.

It is diverse. Okay, not like Queens or whatever, and I hate using this term because it is so cliche, but it's true! I am a semi-yuppie and I have neighbors who are senior citizens, students, families, hipsters, hippies, and people who work for a living as analysts, cops, and laborers.

It's affordable. Yeah, I know people here think the East Side is expensive, but compared to big cities, it is such a bargain for what you get.

Parking ISN'T a problem. People say, "I can't park on the East Side". Yes, it is true that at midnight I may have to park about 3 blocks from my house. This sure beats the mile plus I would park from the apartment in DC or VA when arriving that late.

There are always things to do and people out enjoying life. Just stroll down Brady Street when the weather is nice, you'll see.

These are just a few reasons why the East Side of Milwaukee is great. Maybe later on today I can post reasons why the City of Milwaukee is great!

Heard It All Before

We hear it all the time. Low income, often immigrant, blue-collar neighborhoods being turned into hipster playgrounds. This has affected most cities across the nation, but perhaps none more than NYC. From the South Bronx to Brooklyn, Lower East Side to Queens, hipsters and yuppies move in, drive up the rents and drive out their poorer neighbors. It appears that the Dominican stronghold of Washington Heights is joining that list. You can read more in this NYTimes article.

Is this a bad thing? Probably, but that isn't the point, it is happening all over the place and will continue to happen whether it is 'good' or 'bad'. Remember, the decision maker here is profit. If someone can make a buck and it so happens that others are displaced so be it. That is just an inevitable inconvenience. But what do those of us who are bothered by this change to do? Remember, this movement isn't caused by Dominicans 'moving on up' because of an increase in their incomes, they're being forced out because of rising rents.

What to do? Probably nothing. Visit Washington Heights as a tourist, grab a bite to eat, sip some coffee, have a beer or three, take a photo and move on.

I am not bothered by this because I'm a post-modern liberal who decries not merely the injustice but the loss of some authentic ethnic-enclave which is more 'real' than my suburban roots will ever be. Okay, I sorta am. But what really bothers me is the displacement of the working class and the continued homogenization of our culture. Do we really want our cities to be yuppie and hipster playgrounds of consumption?

I suggest that our society does want everything to be like a mall and if there are losers along this path so be it. Just pray you're on the winning side or else you'll find yourself living in a ghetto suburb without a mall or be doing time in prison.