City January 19, 2012 9:26 AM

Buffalo Has 19th Highest Growth in Per Capita Metro GDP in the World

Buffalo Rising 65

Buffalo ranked 19th on Brookings Institution Metro Monitor 2011 for highest per capita metro GDP in the world. At the same time, Buffalo experienced the 4th highest income growth rate for any metro area relative to their home nation. Perhaps most impressively, Buffalo had the 2nd highest income growth rate of any metro area in the United States.

Buffalo has ranked well in per capita GDP growth over the past few years and the Brookings report validates that trend. While Buffalo's income levels have historically lagged other major metro areas, we are experiencing per capita income growth as well which is helping close that gap. Only one American city had a higher income growth rate from 2010 to 2011 - Houston, Texas.

Global Metro Monitor: Volatility, Growth and Recovery 2011

Excerpts of findings include...

"Metro areas specializing in commodities and business and financial services within their countries exhibited the strongest performance. By contrast, metro areas with high concentrations of local/non-market services (education, health care, administrative services, government) or construction registered only sluggish growth last year. manufacturing accounted for the largest share of output growth in 59 metro areas from 2010 to 2011, including many in which it does not rank as the largest industry....

"Some metro areas significantly over-performed or under-performed their nations economically (table 3). On income growth, six US metro areas, including three manufacturing centers in the Great Lakes region (Buffalo, Detroit, and Rochester), ranked among the ten metro areas that outpaced their nations by the largest margins. Those metro areas that lagged their nations by the greatest degree on this measure included three in china (Beijing, Guangzhou, and Hangzhou) as well as three others in the pacific rim with important trading ties to that nation (Brisbane, Kuala lumpur, and perth). Employment growth differentials between metro areas and their nations were somewhat smaller at the extremes, though still sizable in a handful of Chinese metro areas that outperformed the national average (Shanghai, Hangzhou, Shenzhen), and in US metro areas that lost jobs even as the nation posted a modest gain (Atlanta, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Richmond, Sacramento)."

See index charts below:

Thanks to Grant Wigmore for passing along this information.

View image

Comments

65 Comments Leave a comment

buffalofalling

January 19, 2012 10:12 AM

A one-year snapshot that shows good indicators for Buffalo is merely an anomoly due to the global economic recession. If all the rest of the metros did as they have always done, Buffalo would be buried at the bottom. Simply, when the economy rebounds, the metros that have faired well in the past will rebound and will again put downward pressure on metros that have historically struggled. It's a push-pull idea. When other metros do well, they'll pull people and jobs from here as they have always done.

I love Brookings and they do great work, but don't get giddy over one year of descriptive statistics and where no proof of an imminent trend is presented or even evident. This is statisitical folly at its best. Go read "Proofiness" or some other stats text that explains how people misinterpret stats and statisticians misuse them. This is a perfect example.

[ Reply ]

Score: -34 ( 44 votes )

Eliot Spitzer

January 19, 2012 10:36 AM

This is not an anomoly (sic) as Buffalo's per capita GDP numbers have been impressive (and accelerating) for a decade. It's just that you're ignorant to the broader economic reality.

http://www.urbanophile.com/2011/02/24/new-metro-gdp-data-released/

[ Reply ]

replied to buffalofalling

Score: 20 ( 28 votes )

paulsobo

January 19, 2012 10:21 AM

But its better to be on the list 1x and have those statistics to reference here in luring business development and job creation and investment than to not have those statistics to back you up at all.

[ Reply ]

Score: 10 ( 14 votes )

Rand503

January 19, 2012 11:58 AM

Sorry, but companies don't move to an area just because there are people with money. Retail stores will certainly look at the data to determine whether there are available shoppers, but that's about it.

[ Reply ]

replied to paulsobo

Score: -1 ( 5 votes )

NBuffguy

January 19, 2012 10:58 AM

Buffalo has one of the fastest rates of population decline in the country and one of the fastest growing rates of personal income. I wonder if the two statistics can be related somehow, as it seems to indicate that the people who moved out of Buffalo were the ones with the lowest income, people who moved away because they were unemployed in Buffalo.

[ Reply ]

Score: 6 ( 16 votes )

bradman

January 19, 2012 11:32 AM

I remember seeing a census map for 2010 which showed that the census tracts with the fastest population decline were in east side Buffalo whereas more affluent areas were either growing, stable or at least not declining nearly as fast. It stands to reason that those of lower economic standing would have more to gain by leaving the area for a better life than those who are already living comfortably.

[ Reply ]

replied to NBuffguy

Score: 5 ( 7 votes )

jattea

January 19, 2012 11:11 AM

>At the same time, of the 200 largest metro areas in the world, Buffalo experienced the 4th highest income growth.

I don't think you're interpreting the data correctly. Buffalo did not have the fourth highest income growth. That chart shows the difference in income growth between the metro area and the nation. As you can see in that list, Jiddah had almost double the rate of income growth than Buffalo, but ranked lower than Buffalo because Saudi Arabia's income growth was 4.8% (versus America's 0.9% income growth in the same period).

Not trying to pick nits, but it's misleading (and not very believable) to say that Buffalo had the fourth highest income growth out of the 200 largest metro areas in the world.

[ Reply ]

Score: 6 ( 8 votes )

Administrator

January 19, 2012 11:52 AM

Thanks for pointing that out. Post updated to reflect that fact.

[ Reply ]

replied to jattea

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

paulsobo

January 19, 2012 11:55 AM

I do think it would help our region:
-if UB Amherst and the Airport were connected by Light Rail.
-if we had a new convention/conference center.
-if ECC put their Medical Program downtown with the rest of the medical programs
-and in particular if we inventoried our historic buildings and atleast salvaged their facades at most rebuilt a few of the jewels from the 1901 PAN AM, a ship from LaSalle's Griffon which explored the great lakes, a ship from Adm Perry's War of 1812 & Battle of Lake Erie, leveraged TESLA in Niagara Falls with a museum or Center for Excellence.

These things establish a cultural brand in a positive way regionally, nationally and globally...that inturn attacts investment and tourism.

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 12 votes )

Rand503

January 19, 2012 12:02 PM

sorry to keep raining on your parade, but no. The number of people who need to travel from the airport to UB is miniscule and not worth spending a billion dollars. It would be cheaper to let anyone who wants to drive that distance be given a free rental car.

Agreed about the convention center -- outdated and too small to attract real business. And I'm all for doing what it takes to attract tourism, but we already have so much that we don't capitalize upon.

Yes, it would be great to move ECC to downtown and consolidate, but that doesn't really change much of anything.

[ Reply ]

replied to paulsobo

Score: 3 ( 7 votes )

brownteeth

January 19, 2012 12:13 PM

Almost everything you listed is a waste of time and money. How does connecting UB with the airport via light rail do anything for our economy, job growth, desirability, etc? I can drive between both in 15 mins with traffic, why would I spend an hour on a train?

Our convention center, albeit outdated, serves the need for our city. Building a new larger one would just create more meeting space to fill that will never get filled to justify the cost. If anything, just continue updating the facade to make it more attractive.

Recreating historic buildings is not the same as having historic buildings. That's like going to Vegas to see their version of the Eiffel Tower as opposed to France. People who are in to architecture want to real thing.

Furthermore, you assume that most people even care enough about architecture to move to a particular city for it. Even if some do, it's not going to affect the poplutation significantly one way or another.

[ Reply ]

replied to paulsobo

Score: 3 ( 7 votes )

DeanerPPX

January 19, 2012 1:19 PM

I think Paulsobo may be trying to say that UB Amherst and the airport should be connected to the light rail SYSTEM, not a direct connection between the two. (extend the current line to Amherst, then build another line between Downtown and the airport)

To that, I would add connections to the Tonawandas and Niagara Falls, and perhaps heavy rail or commuter lines to the Southtowns, Lockport, and eastern suburbs.

[ Reply ]

replied to paulsobo

Score: 8 ( 8 votes )

rustbeltcity

January 19, 2012 12:13 PM

Oh please. Take Amherst out of the picture and see where the income level for "Buffalo" is. Also, these stats certainly won't bring retail intown. Maybe enlarge the Galleria at most. If these "lists" were credible, so would People and Star magazines be.

[ Reply ]

Score: -20 ( 26 votes )

Tom

January 19, 2012 4:59 PM

seriously? Amherst is a suburb of Buffalo... when you live in the suburbs and you go to other areas of the world you say you are from Buffalo..

[ Reply ]

replied to rustbeltcity

Score: 5 ( 7 votes )

rustbeltcity

January 20, 2012 8:40 AM

mmmm, no. very few people actually say they are from Buffalo when traveling. To embarrassing, usually hear two words. New York

[ Reply ]

replied to Tom

Score: -8 ( 12 votes )

Black Rock Lifer

January 20, 2012 8:59 AM

No, almost everyone says they are from Buffalo, as I do with pride. Tell someone you are from Amherst or Lancaster and they will give you a blank stare as those places have no identity outside of WNY.

[ Reply ]

replied to rustbeltcity

Score: 7 ( 9 votes )

elias

January 20, 2012 9:04 AM

i think you're wrong, and if you are one of those who believes this, then maybe, if you haven't already, be one of those who leaves also...pack up and go to north carolina, or arizona, since its so much less embarassing to be from there than dinky old buffalo...i travel a few times a year and always tell people with great pride i am from buffalo, and what an awesome place it is...yeah yeah, snow, wide right, no goal, chicken wings, pretty embarassing...you sound like you are part of the perpetual problem we face in this area and thats a negative view of ourselves...i love MY rust belt city!

[ Reply ]

replied to rustbeltcity

Score: 5 ( 9 votes )

JohnMarko

January 22, 2012 5:31 PM

Only in your mind.

I've lived/visited many world cities from Honolulu to London, and not ONCE has anybody from Buffalo (or Amherst, Kenmore, etc.) EVER said anything other than "I'm from BUFFALO".

Only people from New York CITY say they are from "New York".

[ Reply ]

replied to rustbeltcity

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

Black Rock Lifer

January 20, 2012 8:54 AM

Amherst is beginning to decline, Buffalo is showing slow but steady improvement.

[ Reply ]

replied to rustbeltcity

Score: 4 ( 6 votes )

KangDangaLang

January 21, 2012 10:29 AM

How so?

[ Reply ]

replied to Black Rock Lifer

Score: -2 ( 4 votes )

pampiniform

January 22, 2012 12:11 AM

That was a fair question. Is there any objective basis to a statement like Blackrock made? Or is that him manifesting a desire to see the suburbs decline?

[ Reply ]

replied to KangDangaLang

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

elias

January 22, 2012 7:28 PM

i'll attempt to jump on this landmine...amherst in recent years has experienced a rise in crime and even murders along the area around windermere, oxford, nf blvd in recent years...i do not have the facts to back it up, just what i recall from news stories..vacancies are sorta noticable too if you take a ride around this area...i don't think its wishful thinking, but the perception is exactly that. this section is very much a part of amherst as are the swanky parts. i believe that is a legitimate observation by blackrocklifer.

[ Reply ]

replied to pampiniform

Score: 3 ( 5 votes )

Black Rock Lifer

January 23, 2012 8:39 AM

Actually many of the older suburbs are in decline. Kenmore, West Seneca, Cheektowaga, Depew, and other first ring suburbs have seen increased crime, vacancies, deteriorating housing, and middle class flight. These problems were once contained in the city but are now advancing as sprawl based developement pushes further outward.

[ Reply ]

replied to pampiniform

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

Black Rock Lifer

January 22, 2012 10:52 PM

Amherst is aging out, the areas closest to Buffalo are starting to experience the same problems we saw 40 years ago in once stable old city neighborhoods. I have relatives in the Sheridan Drive-Sweet Home Road area that built new in the early 1960's. Their neighborhood has certainly declined, especially in the last 5 or 10 years. The homes were not quality built and are not anything special and have suffered from the effects of sprawl, like many other first ring suburbs.

It took only 50 years to see signs of decline in Amherst, old city neighborhoods were vital for a 100 or even 150 years. The future of sprawl appears to be one of ever shorter lifespans for our communities as discontent and the race for bigger, better, and newer dominates our ability to make sound and responsible judgements..

[ Reply ]

replied to KangDangaLang

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

CatLick

January 19, 2012 12:49 PM

Wow, its hard to believe the third-poorest city in America also has the 19th Highest Per Capita Metro GDP in the World

[ Reply ]

Score: 9 ( 11 votes )

DeanerPPX

January 19, 2012 1:34 PM

We are often bombarded by negative statistics for the City of Buffalo alone, rather than the more positive numbers for the Metro Region as a whole.

To describe an economy that covers five counties and stretches from the PA line to Lake Ontario to the edge of the Finger Lakes (and even across the border into Canada) by the 42-square-mile city limits... is like Judging the entire US economy by only looking at the NYC/Philly/DC corridor.

I say this brings up another good argument for consolidation of City/County governments. We are too busy squabbling between the needs of Amherst-vs-Buffalo, and even Elmwood-vs-EastSide. The Buffalo Metro Area spends too many of its resources fighting between neighbors instead of working together to advance the entire region.

[ Reply ]

replied to CatLick

Score: 11 ( 13 votes )

TranspoGuy

January 19, 2012 5:15 PM

The designation of "3rd poorest" referred to the city only, not the entire metro area. This study is looking at metro area populations.

[ Reply ]

replied to CatLick

Score: 5 ( 7 votes )

DeanerPPX

January 19, 2012 11:27 PM

Even many statistics for 'city only' are skewed, as many cities in the US have annexed their neighboring suburbs. In the extreme example, Jacksonville, FL is the same thing as all of Duvall County... the two governments merged to form one entity. Other cities in the south and west were spaced further apart, so they had room to grow in the 20th century, without being hedged in by neighboring towns, as happened in the northeast during the 19th century.

Take Oklahoma City, for example. They are the 44th largest metro area in the US (Buffalo is 47th) so they are comparably the same size as us in metro population. But at 606 square miles, 47% of their MPA population lives within the city limits. Buffalo is only 40.5 square miles, so only 23% of our MPA is within the city. That disparity keeps Buffalo down at the 70th largest city in population, while OKC shoots up to #31.

Atlanta (city) bleeds across three counties, while Atlanta (MPA) is the size of West Virginia and extends into three states.

If Buffalo annexed its first ring suburbs (as places like Pittsburgh and Cleveland did), our metro statistics would remain the same but the city statistics would change dramatically.

[ Reply ]

replied to TranspoGuy

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

TranspoGuy

January 20, 2012 3:46 PM

I totally agree with you. That is why the statistics are very hard to compare.

[ Reply ]

replied to DeanerPPX

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

ex-716

January 19, 2012 12:58 PM

Of these statistics, the most positive for the long-term seems to be Buffalo's rank at 19 in the world on per-capita GDP. It is a snapshot, but unlike the stat about 2010-2011 growth versus the USA's growth overall, the per-capita GDP doesn't fluctuate as fast as a one-year change stat does.

People need to remember that just because a region's GDP is large doesn't mean that the people who live there are wealthy. A lot of Buffalo's commerce doesn't benefit people living in Buffalo or create jobs in Buffalo -- it benefits shareholders and people in other places along the chain of production. The same can be said for Detroit and Des Moines -- a factory or transportation hub can generate tremendous wealth without many employees. This doesn't mean that we should vilify big corporations or shareholders. Those people investing in Buffalo is better than them investing other places because there is tremendous "leakage" of regional GDP into the local economy.

[ Reply ]

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

Chris

January 19, 2012 1:22 PM

I think everyone that views this article on BR is familar with the reality and issues of what is going on in western new york. The region is far from perfect and has taken its fair share of body and head blows. However, there does seems to be a resurgence going on and the wave is growing. This article is a good example of the growing wave.

[ Reply ]

Score: 7 ( 9 votes )

Chris

January 19, 2012 7:07 PM

Another element of the turning tide.

They place us in Business/Financial Services not manufacturing.

[ Reply ]

replied to Chris

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

The Kettle

January 19, 2012 1:42 PM

Predictably, credible reports of good news for the region are countered by this board's "reality" bunch with dismissive and irrelevant cliches.

Good news is hard to accept for some.

[ Reply ]

Score: 9 ( 13 votes )

whatever

January 19, 2012 10:06 PM

"good news", you say?

It's great news! Does your bunch's minimizing of this as merely good when really it's great reveal a limit on your love for Buffalo?

Predictably, great news is hard to accept for some. The most they'll admit to is good.

Dismissive bunch think countering our region's great news. Sad yet predictable.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

flyguy

January 19, 2012 4:15 PM

Makes sense when all the boom towns are in bust and the rust belt cities, essentially off the economic boom and bust radar just keep plodding along with their bond-like slow and steady low returns lower risk probably more sustainable economies. I would imagine these cities will rapidly fall back off the list if boom times arrive again. I think its more a result of cities like Buffalo being pretty well isolated from the rest of the economy, self supporting in a way. The problem is the rate of improvement is slow compared to the amount of damage left by a time when Buffalo was boom and bust dependent and powers that be felt it ok to offshore just for the sake of bigger profits, paying no attention to what the impacts were back home to social structure, quality of life and neighborhoods. I guess that just didnt matter, only money matters. The economy of ME ME ME screw the other guy, not We. Somewhere "we the people" became "me the people"

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

BuffaloQPublic

January 19, 2012 4:54 PM

I ditto your comments CatLick!

I suspect at least a third of Buffalo's population, who are at the lower end income level and struggling, would disagree with Brookings assessment.

[ Reply ]

Score: 1 ( 3 votes )

whatever

January 19, 2012 9:58 PM

Great news, but can we believe it so soon after we're told repeatedly by our area's new honest leadership full of smarts and integrity that this area has had really awful economic decline over the past few years because of his predecessor?

lol, maybe just from force of habit our new leader's people will again buy billboards or TV ads with messages like this as a rebuttal to what Brookings says
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw8cWBkRfeA
All those frowns and empty buildings!

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 1 votes )

The Kettle

January 20, 2012 7:35 AM

Does the party still pay you for guerrilla campaigning here even though the election was months ago?

If so, that sounds like a great, not good, way to make a buck.

Whatever> "Does your bunch's minimizing of this as merely good when really it's great reveal a limit on your love for Buffalo?"

Not at all. Just being modest.

On the other hand, your friend's trotting out tales of metros that are inevitably on the path to decline/prosperity, 3rd poorest city nonsense, and desire by some to cut suburban areas out of the equation just for the heck of it, may reflect a lack of love and civic self loathing.

It may explain the motivation behind some who feel the need to one-up articles or comments on this site with their own concept of "reality."

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: -2 ( 4 votes )

whatever

January 20, 2012 10:45 PM

"On the other hand, your friend's…"

Who? lol, so you imagine that you know who my friends are, who I work for, …

Yes, modest you are (if you have the definition of modest mixed up with delusional)...

And I still don't know why you refuse to admit the report is great news. Isn't this area allowed to have great economic news? To borrow a Trav expression, are you stuck in negatron thinking that we're limited to good at best?

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

The Kettle

January 21, 2012 5:35 AM

Pot> "so you imagine that you know who my friends are..."

Clearly I was talking about your friends here not imagining who your non-bro friends are. Taking that from what I said, and the lame good-great thing, seems like some delusional thinking of your own.

Pot-kettle... again.

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: -1 ( 3 votes )

whatever

January 22, 2012 7:36 PM

"your friends here"

That's dumb polarizing too. People can agree or disagree issue by issue. Your repeated grouping of me and a few others into some "bunches" doesn't even make sense within this thread. CatLick (possibly krusty? doesn't matter anyway) and BuffaloQPublic were the only two in this so far one who said the 3rd-poorest (which yes, is nonsense) is somehow meaningful…
yet according to you I'm somehow lumped in with what those two said as part of "my friends here"?
Since when have I ever agreed lock step with CatLick even if that's Karl or (especially) with BuffaloQPublic? I've often disagreed with BQP.

Yep, I put you into a Buffalo-hating bunch this time about your merely "good" remark to show how dumb that kind of bunching looks - just for fun!

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

The Kettle

January 23, 2012 6:53 AM

Pot> " Your repeated grouping of me and a few others into some "bunches" doesn't even make sense within this thread."

So classifying people who generally share similar values and views under the umbrella of "freinds" is dumb and polarizing now? Or is this another case of something being bad when I do it but perfectly okay for you (along with strawman arguments "mind reading" etc).

Didn't know being called somebody's friend would be such a strong statement. Perhaps "friend" may be too provocative of a word. I guess I'll have to substitute it with "people whatever will hold to a different standard," "people whatever is less or non critical of," or "people who whatever will jump in and defend if someone is critical of them."

An no, just like real friends, the fact that you are not in lock step with everything they say does not disqualify you from being associated with them.

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

whatever

January 24, 2012 12:10 AM

kettle>"classifying people who generally share similar values and views under the umbrella of "freinds" is dumb and polarizing now?"

Very dumb this time since my comments don't even 'generally share similar views' with those who talked about 3rd poorest. Not even close.
So it wasn't even meaningful polarizing - or classifying if you prefer that word - it was made up b.s., just like other imaginary classifications you keep lumping people into on here ad hominem style instead of sticking to merits of what they write - the 'bash-Buffalo crew' today about burch and some unnamed 'crew', or 'pro-demolition crowd', etc.

I'm not saying classifications can never be meaningful, but the way you do it at other commenters on here is often knee jerk, inaccurate, smearing. At best it's cartoonish, to borrow another word sometimes used on here. Deserves mocking.

It's a blog of course, so all in good fun - part of my fun is to mock lame b.s. 'classifying' - especially when it's toward me.
Like I said, by far most who comment here are good about having honest differences of opinion without any of that.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

The Kettle

January 24, 2012 8:10 AM

Pot >"...it was made up b.s., just like other imaginary classifications you keep lumping people into on here ad hominem style instead of sticking to merits of what they write."

Can you give me a specific example of me "lumping" people into a category that was not based on the merits of what they wrote? You may not like or agree with me calling people anti-Buffalo but when I do so, it is based on what they contribute, not my imagination.

I may draw reasonable conclusions based on what people have written in other discussions but that isn't any different your spin on Burch's "toilet bowl" remark in the ECC discussion. I also like to embellish at times for the sake of a laugh so I appreciate the "cartoonish" comment.

Also, if you dislike being associated with people here I feel are bashing Buffalo, why did you react the way you did when I made the original comment that provoked this discussion? After all, I didn't mention anybody by name and wasn't referring to any comments you made. Maybe feelings of solidarity or other common links you share with those I was critical of made you feel the need to take me down a peg.

Again, I didn't even mention you as part of this group but if the shoe fits...

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

pampiniform

January 24, 2012 4:46 PM

Well, what about your frequent classification of people as "pro - vacant lot"? That is a perfect example of what he's accusing you of. Not that you ever mentioned any names of anyone who belonged to this group, but do you really think that there are people who are actively in favor of vacant lots in the city? Do you think that maybe there are people who see vacant lots as an unfortunate result of Buffalo's half century of economic and population decline, rather than something that should be aspired for, or some other more nuanced viewpoint? In any case you did it again right there:
> "You may not like or agree with me calling people anti-Buffalo but when I do so, it is based on what they contribute, not my imagination." Do you see what I mean? Does it mean that just because you don't see eye-to-eye with someone, or they they aren't as bullish as you are, that they are anti - Buffalo? Of course, you could just give us the names of some of these anti - Buffalo people and we can ask them. But since you seem to like to poison the well when you argue on here, I don't suppose anyone is going to change it. I've tried calling you out on it, and have even tried giving you a taste of what you dish out, but you are either completely anodyne or oblivious that you never seemed to have noticed.
As for the toilet bowl thing, why don't you ask Burch what he meant?

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

The Kettle

January 24, 2012 6:55 PM

Pamp> "That is a perfect example of what he's accusing you of."

Not at all. I've only mentioned the PVLC to describe people who have expressed a generally pro-demo viewpoint. No imagining, just using what you guys type here. Like whatever, I believe you are confusing generalizations you don't like with "lies" and "mindreading".

Pamp> "or they they aren't as bullish as you are, that they are anti - Buffalo?"

I never said or implied people had to agree with me to be considered pro-Buffalo. If I said something similar ( or made a much more accurate generalization) the "mindreading" police would be all over it. I guess it is okay when you do it though.

Back to your point: Would you consider someone who calls the city a "toilet bowl" anti-Buffalo? How about those tripping over themselves to find numbers to refute the good news from Brookings? Or those who talk up the City of Buffalo's poor ranking on an oft trumpeted Forbes list while dismissing far more credible research on the region at large? I would, hence my use of the anti-Buffalo tag. Disagree if you'd like but my viewpoint was formed using what these guys wrote here not my imagination.

Pamp> " As for the toilet bowl thing, why don't you ask Burch what he meant? "

Why? I think he made himself pretty clear.

[ Reply ]

replied to pampiniform

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

pampiniform

January 24, 2012 8:09 PM

So who are these pro vacant lot people who you keep mentioning? Care to mention any names? Or are some nameless target who you can attack for disagreeing with you? You mentioned "you guys". Who is that supposed to refer to?
As for those people who dismissed that 1940's era picture as a toilet bowl (which Burch/Whatever confirmed was what they meant), I think that that is a safe point. The clouds of thick black smoke and dirty buildings made the city look like the kind of place you would seriously consider moving out of. To say nothing of the industrial wasteland that the waterfornt was at the time. As for the Brookings institute thing, I think that a fair amount of skepticism is in order. Statistics are a notoriously unpredictable thing, malleable to interpretation and misinterpretation. An incredible sounding statistic like that is certainly one that invites scrutiny as to the methodology. And what is that credible research you're talking about? Care to mention any sources? In any case, Burch did make himself clear, and you were wrong.
I expect you to ignore large parts of this post that you can't answer like you usually do in your response.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

The Kettle

January 24, 2012 8:48 PM

Pamp> "So who are these pro vacant lot people who you keep mentioning?"

Is this another one of those "questions" where you have a pre-arranged response? That certainly doesn't sound like a legit question as you have read multiple times where I have referred to somebody here, including yourself, as pro-vacant lot. Just get to the part where you disagree with my generalization and skip the two part mock question-answer thing.

Pamp> "which Burch/Whatever confirmed was what they meant."

Lol! Yeah I saw that. I'm sure whatever's comment had no effect on Burch's clarification. Right...

Pamp> "The clouds of thick black smoke and dirty buildings made the city look like the kind of place you would seriously consider moving out of."

And I'll repeat that there is nothing wrong with people feeling this way. There is also nothing wrong with me calling people professing dislike of what in their eyes are "toilet bowls," industrial wastelands," and "decrepit rat infested eyesores" as anti-city. No need to get offended as I am only making an observation. Again, just using what gets typed here and not making anything up."

Pamp> "And what is that credible research you're talking about? Care to mention any sources?"

I'll give you a hint: you mentioned their name in the previous sentence.

[ Reply ]

replied to pampiniform

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

pampiniform

January 24, 2012 9:59 PM

No, that was a legitimate question. I asked you who you thought was "pro vacant lot". I see you've mentioned me. Anyone else? Of course dismissing somebody as "pro vacant lot" is any easy way to try to discredit their argument with an inaccurate, poisoning - the -well, ad hominem type of an argument. I most certainly am not "pro -vacant lot". There are cases where I think that buildings have outlived their usefulness, but that does not mean that I am in favor of vacant lots. I just see them as an unfortunate part of the state of affairs in Buffalo.
See, I think you're doing it again. In your book, if someone says something bad about the city, does that automatically lump them in as "anti -city"? Do you always have to see things in such black and white terms? Can it be possible that someone can say things about Buffalo that you don't care for, and not be anti - city? Or is this some kind of love it or leave it type of situation? And you are certainly free to make observations, even as wrong as they usually are.
Looking through those links, I see widely diverging numbers as to Buffalo's metropolitan numbers, and posting articles that do not paint as rosey a picture of the situation here is not the same as trying to refute this BI report.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

The Kettle

January 25, 2012 6:35 AM

Pamp> " I see you've mentioned me. Anyone else? "

I won't participate in these phony interrogations. Everything I have written here is readable through the "search" option so feel free to use that if you'd like my views on the PVLC.

Pamp> "pro vacant lot" is any easy way to try to discredit their argument with an inaccurate, poisoning - the -well, ad hominem type of an argument."

How is calling someone pro-vacant lot "discrediting their argument?" It illustrates their viewpoint on a given issue that's all. Much the same way "preservationist," "homer," or "pro-decrepit building" are colorful ways to illustrate my viewpoints and not poisoning of the well.

I'm not trying to discredit anybody's argument but I think people's biases and viewpoints on a given issue ought to be revealed if they are hiding them. Some here try to give their position the illusion of superiority by pretending their views are the result of purely objective thinking. "Pro-vacant lot" and "anti-city" are just ways of keeping this "objectivity" in context of views someone has expressed here in the past.

Pamp> "Or is this some kind of love it or leave it type of situation?"

We've discussed that PVLC etc are relative terms that apply more to some and less to others so I won't repeat myself beyond that. I'd just like to know where the strawman argument police are when I need them (never said black vs white, love vs hate etc).

[ Reply ]

replied to pampiniform

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

whatever

January 24, 2012 10:39 PM

kettle>"Yeah I saw that. I'm sure whatever's comment had no effect on Burch's clarification. Right..."

Nope, for any who focused on burch's actual words, it looked clearly not "bashing Buffalo" as was accused by you. Like I just said over here...

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

whatever

January 24, 2012 10:52 PM

kettle>"if you dislike being associated with people here I feel are bashing Buffalo, why did you react the way you did when I made the original comment that provoked this discussion?"

As I wrote over there, I disagreed with your claim it was "bashing Buffalo" at all, let alone making burch part of a "bash-Buffalo crew" as you accused (which I also noted the crew part was yet another instance of dumb b.s.-filled grouping/"classifying"... was just my 2 cents about it).

kettle>"I didn't even mention you as part of this group but if the shoe fits"

True, and I never implied you lumped me into that group this time. But I'm not so self centered as to not have any views about it even so.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

The Kettle

January 25, 2012 6:43 AM

You didn't just disagree with my position, you posted 7 comments arguing your point. Can we agree that emphatic support of those I was critical of validates a friendship between you guys as i indicated earlier?

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

CatLick

January 23, 2012 3:48 PM

Don't either of you bring me into this. I post for sh^ts and giggles, that's it. This is an escape from reality. You want my real thoughts and opinions, read my published material.

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: -1 ( 1 votes )

The Kettle

January 23, 2012 7:16 PM

Don't look at me.

[ Reply ]

replied to CatLick

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

CatLick

January 23, 2012 8:00 PM

But, you have brought me in dog, in the past; you still owe me a brew at Coles.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

The Kettle

January 24, 2012 8:11 AM

My bad Karl. Didn't recognize you as Catlick.

[ Reply ]

replied to CatLick

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

CatLick

January 24, 2012 6:10 PM

No worries, Pot.

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

NBuffguy

January 20, 2012 11:25 AM

This article in today's Buffalo News seems so at odds for the city that has the 19th highest growth in per capita metro GDP in the World.

REGION'S JOB RECOVERY FINDS ITSELF IN REVERSE
2nd straight monthly drop accents year’s loss of 2,000
By David Robinson
January 20, 2012

The Buffalo Niagara region’s job recovery is officially on hiatus.

The region lost 2,000 jobs from December 2010 to December 2011, or 0.4 percent, the second straight monthly decline in the local job market and the steepest drop since July 2010, according to figures released Thursday by the state Labor Department.

Click here for full article: http://www.buffalonews.com/business/article714556.ece

[ Reply ]

Score: 1 ( 5 votes )

The Kettle

January 20, 2012 12:33 PM

Losing jobs and Per capita GDP growth are not necessarily tied together. The combination of the two may just mean we are creating better paying jobs while losing a greater number of lower paying ones.

[ Reply ]

replied to NBuffguy

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

NBuffguy

January 23, 2012 2:49 PM

According to statistics released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics today, Buffalo ranks #141 out of 406 for the nation's top salaries. Put another way, there are 140 other metros in the U.S. with higher average salaries than Buffalo.

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/on-numbers/scott-thomas/2012/01/san-jose-san-francisco-lead-the.html?appSession=101386762687789&RecordID=&PageID=2&PrevPageID=1&cpipage=15&CPISortType=&CPIorderBy=

Don't you just love the way statistics can be twisted around to make a case for just about anything you want to argue?

[ Reply ]

replied to The Kettle

Score: 3 ( 5 votes )

Black Rock Lifer

January 23, 2012 6:14 PM

Of course you don't need a big salary to live large here in Buffalo. My friends from other parts of the country are amazed by the affordability and quality of our housing and the quality of life we take for granted here.

[ Reply ]

replied to NBuffguy

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

The Kettle

January 23, 2012 7:16 PM

I don't see anything being twisted here. I do see people frantically scrambling for numbers of their own as a way of countering or downplaying the Brookings findings which is reveling of the position these people are arguing.

Wny's ranking of average salaries is what it is. That's actually an advantage for certain sectors of the economy who can pay employees less here than elsewhere. But I don't see how that completely different figure is linked to alleged statistics twisting on the part of Brookings.

[ Reply ]

replied to NBuffguy

Score: -1 ( 1 votes )

DOC

January 21, 2012 10:38 PM

What idiot selected the picture accompanying this story? Of all the great views you pick this view? Seriously? Shoot yourself in the foot BRO.

[ Reply ]

Score: 1 ( 3 votes )

pampiniform

January 22, 2012 12:39 AM

I have to say I find this strange. While I don't doubt that Buffalo is making some progress economically, I can't reconcile this with what I see on a daily basis. Where is this economic growth coming from?

[ Reply ]

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

Buffalo Has 19th Highest Growth in Per Capita Metro GDP in the World

Categories:

Comments

Leave a comment

Related Stories

Service Learning: 100% Urban Dedication

Extreme Community Viewing Event: ReUse, PUSH, AmericCorps

Buffalo ReUse ReGifting Party

Recent Comments

Buffalo Rising Media