Both the author, and the critical commentators, make important points that need to be seen and considered. It is perfectly true that New York City was said to be in terminal decline back in the 1970's. In fact, early in Reagan's first term, a national task group on cities suggested that New York City needed to learn to shrink gracefully. This is exactly what the author suggests when he says Buffalo needs to shrink to greatness. However, we can note that New York City is now at an all time high of population, and also prosperity. What happened in the last 30 years? New York entrepreneurs learned how to create new profitable economic activities, and the fashion turned back to city living (particularly after the quality of life began to improve with the decline in crime and the investment in mass transit.)
Buffalo could also do better than the author suggests if entrepreneurs here create new industries, and if the city works to make itself an attractive place to live and do business. That should be the goal. I want to make a final point about the strange and gratuitous anti-New York city comments. There is very little about Buffalo's problems that are actually about New York City. Lots of other old industrial cities that do not share a state or state government with New York City have experienced declines very much like Buffalo's. Come on guys, take a clear look at the facts and accept what needs to be done rather than looking to blame "downstate." Upstate politicians have played that game for years, and where has it lead? No place other than the place you now complain about.
Report this