A funny thing about "worst cities" lists: They ALL have ONE THING in Common!

I have lived in many places, and my work has taken me to dozens of others. Rather than sit in a hotel bar to die time, I like to move around and get the "feel" of the places I visit.

I just returned from an extended visit, and found the city I'd been to featured in a "Worst Cities" list (deservedly so). Based upon my own observations and review of the local news and press, I found myself drawn to a certain gut-feeling about why this place had declined so badly from what I'd remembered of long-past visits.

I decided to look for similar recent compilations and dig a little to see if my feelings were borne out, or completely off base.

What I discovered was that over the period from 2010 to the present, several of these places were consistently among those listed as "worst." Even more revealing was that they shared several of the usual criteria for inclusion frequently used for selection: crime, poverty, corruption, high taxes, housing and services; but, that the mix varied and was never consistent.

However, there was one single factor that these various "worst" places shared, and that it had not changed over time.

What, you might ask, was the "one single factor" that among all the other criteria for inclusion, these terrible places shared between and among themselves?

Shockingly (?), the commonality they shared was that they were at present, or had just recently been, governed by Democrat administrations!

Here is my run-down, in alphabetical order, of the worst of the worst places to live with my notes and reference to this single unifying criterion.

CA (Jerry Brown, (D))
El Centro (Benjamin Solomon (D))
Los Angeles (Antonio Villaragosa (D))
Stockton (Anthony Silva ( R ))
Modesto (Garrad Marsh, (D))
San Bernardino (Pat Morris(D), largest city to file Ch 9 Bkcy.)
Oakland (Jean Quan (D), 3rd in US crime, catered to OWS and gangs)
Vallejo (Osby Davis (D))

IL (Pat Quinn, Democrat - 2 predecessors convicted of corruption)
Chicago (Rahm Emmanuel (D))
Rockford (Larry Morrissey (I))
Waukegan (Robert G. Sabonjian (D))

LA (Bobby Jindal ( R ),
New Orleans (Mitch Landrieu (D), predecessor indicted for corruption, highest murder rate in US.)

MD (Martin O’Malley (D))
Baltimore (Stephanie Blake (D), predecessor convicted of corruption, “on a path to financial ruin”)

MI (Rick Snyder ( R ), predecessor hosted Current TV “War Room” )
Detroit (Dave Bing (D), predecessor convicted of corruption, no taxes paid by majority of owners)
Flint (Dayne Walling (non-partisan))

MO (Jay Nixon (D))
St Louis (Francis Slay (D))

NJ (Chris Christie ( R ), predecessor, Jon Corzine (D) accused of misapplication of customers’ money, theft, corruption, adultery; bankrupted MFGlobal hedge fund)
Atlantic City (Lorenzo Langford (D))
Camden (Dana Redd (D))
Newark (Cory Booker (D)

NY (Andrew Cuomo (D))
New York (Michael Bloomberg, got on ticket as ( R ), formerly/actually (D))

OH (John Kasich ( R ))
Cleveland (Frank Jackson (D))
Toledo (Michael Bell (D))
Youngstown (Charles P. Sammarone (D))

PA (Tom Corbett ( R ))
Philadelphia (Michael Nutter (D))
Scranton (Christopher Doherty (D))

Here are the sources from wich I obtained the lists:

www.coli.org...
www.dailyfinance.com...
www.forbes.com...
newsbusters.org...
www.forbes.com...

I started this inquiry with only a gut feeling; but what I found appears to have borne-out my suspicions.
I still haven't had enough time to see if this holds true over longer periods of time, or even why it holds true at all. I will check to see if academics or peer-reviewed analyses have examined this phenomenon.

jw

Let me guess.

Gun control?

My guess: People.

All cities, including and especially "worst cities" have people in them.

Pripyat, the city by Chernobyl, by comparison is VERY peaceful, wonderful city.

So cities run by democrats are the worst? I'm not up with politics but I'm assuming you're not a democrat?
Sure it has nothing to do with people on government benefits or drug addicts in particular. I don't think it's fair to say that a city is bad because of the gov they follow. No matter what gov they're run by, they're still going to be derros.

reply to post by jdub297


Democrats destroy everything they touch. They are greedy, mercilous people that think if they throw a little (or a lot) of money at a problem, it'll fix itself. They have no personal responsiblity themselves, and expect no one else to exhibit personal responsibility.

That is their big problem.

Left wingers think if they throw OTHER PEOPLES' money at a problem, that will fix it.

reply to post by samuel1990


I'm not making a "cause and effect" judgment; it is too soon; but, the correlation is undeniable.

I've lived in wonderful cities governed by Democrats: Austin, San Antonio, Indianapolis; so, don't take this as a blanket criticism..

The real question will be answered by looking at declines, and how/when they occurred. Cities don't start out as places no one wants to live; it happens over time.

Curious, no?

jw

I'm from Indiana and Gary, Indiana is always in the top 10 worst cities and used to be labeled the "murder capital of the US" and Indiana is an EXTREMELY conservative state. (Also, my state has some of the most lenient gun laws in the country, so no, that's not a factor either.)

reply to post by Bodhi7

Gary, indeed, is on one or two of the lists, but wasn't there as consistently across times and sources as the others. I'm very familiar with the Lake and Porter County area, and it has dsuffered horrible decline with the closing of the mills and the loss of shipping.
I also understand that the rank corruption is being fought successfully (?), but that, alone, won't cure a deteriorating economic base.
I'm also familiar with Chicago businesses and investors who see the area as an opportunity for expansion and cheap acquisitions.

Good luck to you and your community.
jw

reply to post by jdub297


Well, I'm certainly curious as living in Aus, we don't tend to have crazy political things like this going on.
I really was born in the 'lucky country'.

A funny thing about the worst threads on ATS. They all have one thing in common.

They all were written by dumb asses trying to blame stuff on their rival political parties.

reply to post by jdub297


As an 'outsider' looking in what struck me was the number of elected officials, regardless of political affiliation, who had been linked to and found guilty of corruption etc.

Perhaps that's the root cause - greedy bastards who seek public office with the intent of furthering their own political ambitions and lining their own pockets rather than putting the cares, concerns and interests of their constituents first.

reply to post by jdub297


Indianapolis is not now, nor has it ever been in my 35 years living there, been run by democrats. Lets be honest, indiana is the red thorn, in the blue spot in the center of the country. OH and IL, are consistently for dems, as well as michigan, Indiana went Obama in 08, but still this is in no way a sign of local politics.

In short, Indiana is run by the right, and as such, we have money in the bank, low crime and corruption, and a pretty healthy economy, which is the reason the repub party wanted our governor Mitch Daniels ( R) to run against Obama. He would have dominated Obama in the election, his wife didnt want to be ran through the ringer on 24 hour worldwide news for months, so Mitch declined his parties nomination, and the country is the worse for it.

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by samuel1990

 

I'm not making a "cause and effect" judgment; it is too soon; but, the correlation is undeniable.

Correlation is not evidence of causation.

reply to post by jdub297


Maybe they're the only sort who would bother with a deadbeat place?

Not the cause of it.

A bit far fetched in my opinion, as these opinions are completely subjective. One mans trash is another mans dinner for a week.

I rekon a poor guy from bombay would eat like a king where I live. And we're the arse end of the world.

I know I've seen some derelict cities around, and after 6pm any week night and all weekend starting friday arvo, till 5am monday morning, we don't look any different to those ghost towns... maybe more drunks in the gutter, can't tell, don't count 'em.

It might also have something to do that most of the states you mentioned we once industrial and manufacturing centers. People at one time flocked into those areas for jobs and opportunity. Now those jobs and opportunities are disappearing and the jobs left behind do not pay as well. So now you have these clusters of people competing against each other for chump change wages...this creates stress and uncertainty and this erodes the sense of community.

I'm not denying that one party seems to handle things better than the other, but I dislike both of them for a variety of reasons. One party is better with managing money but wants to beat you over the head with their "heightened" sense of morality...the other says it wants you to be free and then creates more laws and fosters the Police/nanny state...I will choose option #3 please...

Originally posted by Druscilla

My guess: People.

All cities, including and especially "worst cities" have people in them.

Pripyat, the city by Chernobyl, by comparison is VERY peaceful, wonderful city.

voice of reason.

Really?!! Believe me, I have been in a number of those cities over the past 20 years and their decline has nothing to do with Democrats. It has more to do with poor government policies overall than the administration that happened to be in office. For instance, Republicans RAPED Michigan over time so it is no surprise that Detroit and Flint are on the list that they have been off and on over the past 20 years.

Oh, also, for the people that still believe that we are a two party system-we have the choice of a puppet with a left hand up it's butt or a puppet with a right hand up its butt. Either way, both sides are puppets to larger interests.

Anyone who thinks a mayor has anything to do with the national party they run under is fooling themselves. Its as silly as the local Sheriff running under party. I also find it ironic that cities that have been crap for generations are suddenly blamed on just the last guy in office.

I think this is what you call a false equivalency.

If we follow the same line of thinking, what does it say about Republicans when we hear that the the biggest welfare states in the country are Red states?

The game can be played both ways and in the end it serves no real purpose to solve real problems.