It's because their police didn't arrest anyone for a month after the Garner protests.
- 8,155
I think that article was fair.... we have had a violent crime surge (especially over the last six to nine months) and the 2014 homicide rate was the second highest since 1995, so by definition that means it "was one of the city's highest in nearly two decades." Fortunately by the grace of god and bullets not being quite on target the number of homicides has decreased in the past month or two, but what should we say about a city that most likely had the highest homicide rate in the nation last year?downtown2007 wrote:Highest rate in 6 years. Not decades. A lot of misinformation out there.dweebe wrote:Lookin' good St. Louis!
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/year ... s-29744523
The young heart patient's death rattled St. Louis, which has been enduring a crime surge. The 2014 homicide rate was one of the city's highest in nearly two decades.
We definitely had the highest rate. When the numbers are published, it isn't going to be pretty.
- 109
St. Louis Ranked 11th as a top travel destination in 2014 by TripAdvisor.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/de ... /70357202/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/de ... /70357202/
Branson #15 lol.. In the entire USWendellOPruitt wrote:St. Louis Ranked 11th as a top travel destination in 2014 by TripAdvisor.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/de ... /70357202/
There's just a crazy number of tower cranes visible from the highway west of Grand these days. This is a view that needs to be shown to the rest country. Any photographers up for it?
- 8,155
Well, I guess this is the mother of all "St. Louis in the National Media"...
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/atla ... 11b6a.html
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/atla ... 11b6a.html
- 109
As soon as I read this article I came here.roger wyoming II wrote:Well, I guess this is the mother of all "St. Louis in the National Media"...
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/atla ... 11b6a.html
I made a wise guess that after Ferguson we would become the new dysfunctional city for the national media but to say Chicago doesn't have issues comparable to St. Louis.........
Chicago is much larger but has the same social issues St. Louis has. lol at them saying housing practices led to Blacks in St. Louis suburbs. Atlanta had multiple housing projects until 2010, that when demolished push people out to East Point and Riverdale which already had a poor suburban pop.
I could go all day but clearly everybody is trying to take a swing.
I always love the Post-Dispatch comment section. Apparently all the region of nearly 3 million's problems are due to the City, which is inhabited by just over 300,000. Because that's an obviously logical conclusion.
- 985
I was thinking with the commenters its more they think the problem is the lower economic classes, especially those who are not white. I'm more surprised they are able to type with white sheets over their eyes and hands.
The comparison between St. Louis and Chicago is absurd and completely slanted to reinforce a narrative- St. Louis as a poster child of urban failure and Chicago as a model for urban success. As usual, Chicago's ugly history of racial inequality gets brushed under the rug while St. Louis gets hung out to dry. This isn't journalism, it's sensationalism.
- 8,155
^ If the AJC is largely comparing the economic might of the two regions and not delving too much into the brotherhood of man then I think there really isn't much to criticize. In the post-war era our region has continually been passed over by others whereas Chicagoland has increased its position as a global player. If it asserts that there is more brotherly love there as well then of course that would be stupid.
- 985
^ what it gets at possibly is the concept of division and how its strongly negatively impacted the St. Louis area. Too often the region fights amongst itself which is self-destructive, it also ties a lot into the parochial mindset often present and in not seeming to concerned with the world outside the bubble. It seems to many locals they can't grasp how this is not normal.
I wonder if the AJC article is in part trying to stem off the same issues creeping in there in terms of divided structures, since there is a clear recipe for it there.
I wonder if the AJC article is in part trying to stem off the same issues creeping in there in terms of divided structures, since there is a clear recipe for it there.
- 173
The city of Chicago has lost several hundred thousand people since 2000 and metro Chicago has performed no better than metro St. Louis in percentage terms. Start doing your research and making the case for St. Louis!roger wyoming II wrote:^ If the AJC is largely comparing the economic might of the two regions and not delving too much into the brotherhood of man then I think there really isn't much to criticize. In the post-war era our region has continually been passed over by others whereas Chicagoland has increased its position as a global player. If it asserts that there is more brotherly love there as well then of course that would be stupid.
While there are a lot of things to be proud of, St. Louis will never change completely until the denial ends.
Some St. Louisans are so caught up in their love for St. Louis that they cannot see (and refuse to see) its faults. And I am talking REGIONAL faults - sprawl, racism, poverty, political nepotism, dinosaur political officeholders, ultra-racialized politics, bloated government, provincialism, complacency, apathy etc.
Keep in mind that other cities face some of the same issues, but we are discussing St. Louis, where they are especially intense. Other cities - not all - do (and have done) a better job of addressing their racial problems.
St. Louis must address its deep-seeded racial problems. There are people who love (or are oblivious to) racial divisiveness - even a few on this board. Anyway, until local leadership and grassroots organizations seek to genuinely address the issue - without fear - St. Louis will continue to be a modest city/region losing ground to others.
I find it interesting that "Better Together" is seeking to address the fractured geographical tomfoolery, but it isn't addressing the racial tomfoolery. It is my assessment St. Louis City/County won't be "Better Together" because of the racial divide. The racial divide in St. Louis seeps into EVERYTHING. Other cities address their racial divides, St. Louis runs from it by ignoring, denying and blaming.
Last, the St. Louis region needs to become more international - and not only with immigrant victims of foreign wars and religious and ethnic conflicts. St. Louis will continue to lag in attracting large numbers of international immigrants because of its reputation of being unfriendly to people of color. Attracting more immigrants could help to diffuse the local black/white divide some.
Ask yourself, why do cities like Chicago, Kansas City and Indianapolis have higher percentages of Latinos? Hell, even Memphis and Nashville and their respective counties have higher percentages.
While I am enthused about all of the new development happening in the city, St. Louis needs a lot of work socially.........and the flagrant arrogance some St. Louisans possess isn't working.
The arrogance, denial and apathy - especially by leadership and locals in the region - is killing St. Louis.
Some St. Louisans are so caught up in their love for St. Louis that they cannot see (and refuse to see) its faults. And I am talking REGIONAL faults - sprawl, racism, poverty, political nepotism, dinosaur political officeholders, ultra-racialized politics, bloated government, provincialism, complacency, apathy etc.
Keep in mind that other cities face some of the same issues, but we are discussing St. Louis, where they are especially intense. Other cities - not all - do (and have done) a better job of addressing their racial problems.
St. Louis must address its deep-seeded racial problems. There are people who love (or are oblivious to) racial divisiveness - even a few on this board. Anyway, until local leadership and grassroots organizations seek to genuinely address the issue - without fear - St. Louis will continue to be a modest city/region losing ground to others.
I find it interesting that "Better Together" is seeking to address the fractured geographical tomfoolery, but it isn't addressing the racial tomfoolery. It is my assessment St. Louis City/County won't be "Better Together" because of the racial divide. The racial divide in St. Louis seeps into EVERYTHING. Other cities address their racial divides, St. Louis runs from it by ignoring, denying and blaming.
Last, the St. Louis region needs to become more international - and not only with immigrant victims of foreign wars and religious and ethnic conflicts. St. Louis will continue to lag in attracting large numbers of international immigrants because of its reputation of being unfriendly to people of color. Attracting more immigrants could help to diffuse the local black/white divide some.
Ask yourself, why do cities like Chicago, Kansas City and Indianapolis have higher percentages of Latinos? Hell, even Memphis and Nashville and their respective counties have higher percentages.
While I am enthused about all of the new development happening in the city, St. Louis needs a lot of work socially.........and the flagrant arrogance some St. Louisans possess isn't working.
The arrogance, denial and apathy - especially by leadership and locals in the region - is killing St. Louis.
- 985
^^ This was exactly what I was getting at. Basically the problem is social rot, and the sad thing is more than a few have tried double downing on the rot. A good historical example of not cleaning the rot and suffering for it is what happened in Birmingham, Alabama in the 1960s. They still have the bad reputation 50 years later from it.
Basically the culture has to change or nothing will work. If the political culture and electorate is unwilling to do so it is possible an outside force might have to step in, especially due to how it negatively impacts disadvantaged groups.
Basically the culture has to change or nothing will work. If the political culture and electorate is unwilling to do so it is possible an outside force might have to step in, especially due to how it negatively impacts disadvantaged groups.
- 8,155
^ if ya'll aren't making the case for Saint Louis, go suck it!
(just joking)
hey, look, there goes Tampa/St. Pete passing us by on the largest metros list!
(sadly, not joking)
(just joking)
hey, look, there goes Tampa/St. Pete passing us by on the largest metros list!
(sadly, not joking)
- 985
^^ I think its basically pointing out what the experts and powers that be are ignoring the root reason and its social in nature and its extremely tied to racial issues. Now that sunlight has been shone on it by outsiders, what happens after that will be key.
If you think about it, as stubborn as it is to root the problem out it could be worse. All that is needed is a change in political culture and changing generations may do it. Most other metro areas have longer-term some real questions as to their fortunes. Many seem to be developing some of the same social cracks and in a more pressing concern a number of places long-term are of questionable viability due to water.
If you think about it, as stubborn as it is to root the problem out it could be worse. All that is needed is a change in political culture and changing generations may do it. Most other metro areas have longer-term some real questions as to their fortunes. Many seem to be developing some of the same social cracks and in a more pressing concern a number of places long-term are of questionable viability due to water.
- 109
St. Louis does have racial issues. I've spoke about them since registering here.
To say a cities success is based on social issues is being myopic. If that is true why is Boston a much healthier city with its known racist culture.
St. Louis' economic health has nothing do with social issues but more to do with the US economy becoming more service than manufacturing.
Look at all the rust belt cities and see if they don't have the same social problems. Cincinnati had the same riot over a police shooting 13 years ago.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1191 ... ons-unrest
To say a cities success is based on social issues is being myopic. If that is true why is Boston a much healthier city with its known racist culture.
St. Louis' economic health has nothing do with social issues but more to do with the US economy becoming more service than manufacturing.
Look at all the rust belt cities and see if they don't have the same social problems. Cincinnati had the same riot over a police shooting 13 years ago.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1191 ... ons-unrest
- 3,433
I agree completely. Its the economy, (stupid). And our history. OKC appears to be booming, and some of that has to do with extending city limits 20 miles out into farmland 50 years ago to make sure the inner city is supported by suburban tax dollars. That boat has sailed here.WendellOPruitt wrote:St. Louis does have racial issues. I've spoke about them since registering here.
To say a cities success is based on social issues is being myopic. If that is true why is Boston a much healthier city with its known racist culture.
St. Louis' economic health has nothing do with social issues but more to do with the US economy becoming more service than manufacturing.
Look at all the rust belt cities and see if they don't have the same social problems. Cincinnati had the same riot over a police shooting 13 years ago.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1191 ... ons-unrest
I was thinking the opposite of Arch City when he said we are too in-love with St. Louis. St. Louis seems to be continually caught up in self-loathing. Locals who grew up here can't seem to find enough bad things to say about their city, unlike folks who moved here from other places. So much of what ails St. Louis is rooted in geography and history. And the media defines success as the number of skyscrapers downtown. But our downtown is effectively in another state geographically -- and up against a water wall. So our center was destined to move West -- not unlike Detroit's downtown. I think we need to accept the fact that we don't need (or want?) to be Dallas or Atlanta. Improving the local economy would do the most to solve problems perceived as only driven by racism. We are a border town between East and West, North and South. We need to see that diversity as a strength.
Read my comment again.........this time SLOWLY.WendellOPruitt wrote:If that is true why is Boston a much healthier city with its known racist culture. St. Louis' economic health has nothing do with social issues but more to do with the US economy becoming more service than manufacturing.
I think you are in major denial. Major. Because even Francis Slay, who I don't consider to be the greatest leader, knows that economic health suffers because of heavy or burdensome socio-economic factors. Why is improving schools, housing, the justice system, health care, employment, levels of education etc. etc. a priority for good leaders? Because it makes the city/region better off socially thereby making your city and region more competitive economically. That's the reality. It has been studied organizations such as East-West Gateway for decades.
Additionally, the world knows, thanks to the BBC, about the Delmar Divide IN St. Louis so putting your head in the sand and pointing to Boston's racial problems isn't going to change or solve ANYTHING in St. Louis. Ever heard the phrase, "Worry about how high the grass is in your own backyard."?
WendellOPruitt wrote: To say a cities success is based on social issues is being myopic.
That's such a naive comment. No offense intended, but clearly you aren't a Social Scientist.
Again, you apparently skipped the very first paragraph of my comment.
And you are wrong.......even some of the most forward-thinking local business leaders have discussed how St. Louis' social problems (particularly real crime and perception of crime, for example) could be impacting (or limiting) companies' willingness to locate jobs in St. Louis.
The reality is......racism is just one piece of the social dysfunction puzzle that exists in metro St. Louis. I gave numerous examples other than racism. It feels disconcerting to read a comment that suggests St. Louis would be okay if only its economy was better. Maybe so, but as I stated, local racial and social problems seep into almost every facet of life in St. Louis. They are intricately woven into St. Louis culture. It's should no longer be business as usual for anyone to be a part of such a culture.
And until St. Louis takes it head out of the sand and give the old dinosaur politicians the boot they deserve, STL will keep getting articles like the one in the AJC written about it.
Stop being in denial. It doesn't help St. Louis. It really doesn't.
Excuses, excuses.gary kreie wrote: I agree completely. Its the economy, (stupid). And our history. OKC appears to be booming, and some of that has to do with extending city limits 20 miles out into farmland 50 years ago to make sure the inner city is supported by suburban tax dollars. That boat has sailed here.
I was thinking the opposite of Arch City when he said we are too in-love with St. Louis. St. Louis seems to be continually caught up in self-loathing. Locals who grew up here can't seem to find enough bad things to say about their city, unlike folks who moved here from other places. So much of what ails St. Louis is rooted in geography and history. And the media defines success as the number of skyscrapers downtown. But our downtown is effectively in another state geographically -- and up against a water wall. So our center was destined to move West -- not unlike Detroit's downtown. I think we need to accept the fact that we don't need (or want?) to be Dallas or Atlanta. Improving the local economy would do the most to solve problems perceived as only driven by racism. We are a border town between East and West, North and South. We need to see that diversity as a strength.
It's not the economy alone........stupid. It's that and stupidity.
Also, if you are going to try to quote me, at least quote and interpret me correctly.......I said, "Some St. Louisans are so caught up in their love for St. Louis that they cannot see (and refuse to see) its faults." That's a far cry from your interpretation.
People can love St. Louis to any extent they desire, but don't be too blind that you can't see how her faults, stubbornness, grandiosity and arrogance keeps her behind and noncompetitive.
If you are okay with out of control crime, hardcore systemic racism, runaway poverty, broken government, a sluggish stagnant economy, sluggish population growth, ridiculous sprawl and mediocre and poor stats in almost every socio-economic measurement, then fine.
The imperfect cities of Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Minneapolis, Denver, Nashville and increasingly Kansas City will keep eating your lunch.
No, St. Louis doesn't have to be like them. It really doesn't.
Tell me if anything in this video is inaccurate.
AJC - Atlanta Forward: A look at St. Louis
It's interesting how cities used to look up and wanted to be like world-class St. Louis, but now some locals in St. Louis think St. Louis is too grand and historic to look up to other emerging world-class cities like Atlanta and Houston. Now other cities want little to no part of St. Louis' shenanigans. BTW, Houston is definitely a world-class city.
Ultimately, I think St. Louis will be okay, it just has work to do.
AJC - Atlanta Forward: A look at St. Louis
It's interesting how cities used to look up and wanted to be like world-class St. Louis, but now some locals in St. Louis think St. Louis is too grand and historic to look up to other emerging world-class cities like Atlanta and Houston. Now other cities want little to no part of St. Louis' shenanigans. BTW, Houston is definitely a world-class city.
Ultimately, I think St. Louis will be okay, it just has work to do.