Philadelphia 2035 (Allentown, York, Washington: sale, condos, neighborhood)

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Explain why the metrics appear to be so significantly higher for every single other city in the top 10?

What agenda could the Inquirer have in allowing the city to look so 3rd world compared to its size peers?

Why paint the city in such a false way?

What can they possibly gain by it?

I don't think it's painting the city in a false way maliciously, but misleadingly or in a way in which they didn't dig deep enough to paint the whole picture.

My main point that the media in general tends to focus only household income, probably because it's what the Census tends to highlight on in its press releases. And this is not unique to the Inquirer at all, but I think their story on it takes it to a new level of concern. But again, it's really not the whole story.

[Duderino]

Also, just an aside, but I think worth pointing out in the conversation about concerns over city poverty/incomes.

One has to look no further than the city's monthly revenue reports to see economic snapshot of the city. City Wage tax collections have increased 4% year-over-year as of July 2018:

https://www.phila.gov/media/20180905...mts_201807.pdf

This isn't something you'll see in a city in which wages are declining.

[AJNEOA]

Originally Posted by Duderino

I don't think it's painting the city in a false way maliciously, but misleadingly or in a way in which they didn't dig deep enough to paint the whole picture.

My main point that the media in general tends to focus only household income, probably because it's what the Census tends to highlight on in its press releases. And this is not unique to the Inquirer at all, but I think their story on it takes it to a new level of concern. But again, it's really not the whole story.

Do you believe that if everyone (not just Philly) focused on the numbers that represent the whole picture, that Philly would rise in the rankings and not be such an outlier? Or is it possible that Philly remains an outlier as other's are elevated when considering the whole picture as well?

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by AJNEOA

Do you believe that if everyone (not just Philly) focused on the numbers that represent the whole picture, that Philly would rise in the rankings and not be such an outlier? Or is it possible that Philly remains an outlier as other's are elevated when considering the whole picture as well?

I think it would depend on the numbers that are discussed; to some degree, Philly is fundamentally disadvantaged in the comparison of the 10 largest cities because they're just fundamentally different in their makeup. Metrics for cities like Houston, San Diego, Dallas or Phoenix all include areas that would be almost distant suburbs in the Philly area, which would allow for much more economically well-off demographics.

I hate to keep throwing out statistics at random, but I don't think there's any other way in this discussion to prove my point on the household versus individual income.

Here's a comparison of the same 10 largest cities for on their individual median earnings (comparing individuals 25 years or older, just to weed out those part-time teenage and college student workers):

2017 Estimates

San Jose: $51,583
San Diego: $45,028
New York City: $42,040
Chicago: $41,012
Philadelphia: $36,789
Phoenix: $36,714
Los Angeles City: $35,521
Houston: $35,795
Dallas: $35,633
San Antonio: $32,587

As you can see, Philly is smack dab in the middle. And considering the cost-of-living in cities like New York and San Diego in particular, I'm hard pressed to see an economic advantage in those cities; perhaps even a slight disadvantage.

[Flyers Girl]

Originally Posted by cpomp

There is also no base for working class people in Philadelphia anymore, there is no industry, and the remainder of the economy is very specialized and reserved for the top 10-20% of earners. You have this huge mass of extreme low income and an island of wealth in CC, and a small and unstable middle class base. The city also has an unwelcoming approach for companies and industry looking to relocate to the area, and the suburbs win again...

That is largely true for the entirety of the country, though. We are a service economy now. We don't make anything anymore. It's frustrating--and head-scratching--to see these results here but not elsewhere in the country. It's almost such a radical shift that I would want someone to audit to see if an error of mass proportions was made.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by Duderino

I don't think it's painting the city in a false way maliciously, but misleadingly or in a way in which they didn't dig deep enough to paint the whole picture.

My main point that the media in general tends to focus only household income, probably because it's what the Census tends to highlight on in its press releases. And this is not unique to the Inquirer at all, but I think their story on it takes it to a new level of concern. But again, it's really not the whole story.

But most will absolutely not dig deeply as you have. They will take those numbers, as published, and condemn the city accordingly.

It will launch another reason to see the city, once again, negatively.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by Duderino

Also, just an aside, but I think worth pointing out in the conversation about concerns over city poverty/incomes.

One has to look no further than the city's monthly revenue reports to see economic snapshot of the city. City Wage tax collections have increased 4% year-over-year as of July 2018:

https://www.phila.gov/media/20180905...mts_201807.pdf

This isn't something you'll see in a city in which wages are declining.

Have you thought about confronting Lubrano, the guy wrote the main article, with, at least, this stat?

Clearly someone told him to ignore facts like this to balance that article. Who knows what is going on with the Inquirer since Lenfest died?

[timeEd32]

Originally Posted by cpomp

https://www.phillymag.com/business/2...ladelphia-bid/

Doesn't look like Philadelphia will be landing HQ2...

Whether this was a stunt or not, what do you think are the biggest reasons why people view DC, Boston, Austin, Atlanta, and even NYC as better choices?

The whole premise of that Geekwire article is flawed. Of course Amazon has the most open positions in the DC/VA area -- their east coast HQ for AWS is there. They've had a presence in NY for certain roles (+ Newark) for awhile. I don't think any of that data is indicative of where they are going with HQ2.

[MarketStEl]

I'm surprised that, in all the electrons you all have spilled over that Inky article, none of you have noted that poverty among non-Hispanic whites has risen in the city since 2015 while it's fallen for blacks and Hispanics.

That rise also accounts for the overall poverty rate holding steady over the past two years.

And did you read that University of Michigan researcher's hypothesis about why this took place? I've been under that huge railroad right-of-way at Kensington and Lehigh. I think the guy's onto something; I've never seen anything like that anywhere in North Philadelphia. And while that may be a byproduct of the disappearance of factory jobs, I don't think it's a direct result, for the factories have been gone for most of the 35 years I've lived here while opioids are a very recent development.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Have you thought about confronting Lubrano, the guy wrote the main article, with, at least, this stat?

Clearly someone told him to ignore facts like this to balance that article. Who knows what is going on with the Inquirer since Lenfest died?

The article wasn't about wages or wage receipts. It was about poverty, and the poverty rate in particular.

Rising wage tax receipts and a high poverty rate can coexist, just as a glittering city core and a stubbornly high poverty rate also coexist now.

I also direct you to my post immediately preceding this one.