Buffalo Makes Forbes’ “America’s Fastest-Dying Cities” List
by Matt at Aug 6th, 2008
How’s this for Brian Higgins demonstrating his leadership and getting results?
With continued population erosion, above-average unemployment and slow economic growth, Buffalo has been included on a list of “America’s Fastest-Dying Cities.”
The list is published by Forbes.com.
Buffalo is the only city in New York state to make the publication’s list. The editors take into account a population loss of nearly 42,000 residents since 2000, an unemployment rate of 5.7 percent compared to 4.3 percent nationally and annualized gross domestic product (GDP) growth of 1.9 percent.
Forbes said: “Buffalo has long been synonymous with city-in-decline. In the early 1900s, Buffalo was one of America’s 10 largest cities, a burgeoning industrial center. It’s been on decline ever since, despite a location that takes advantage of trade with Canada.”
As someone who recently came to Buffalo from out-of-state, it’s really disappointing for me to see a city with so much potential wasting away because of failed leadership.
I heard a clip of Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown whining about the Forbes article, promising to write Forbes Magazine a letter talking about all the positive things about Buffalo that “prove” it’s not a dying city.
I guess that means that Mayor Brown is in the “denial” stage of grief.. but at least he still has his city car, right?
The study was not even an actual study. It was a totally subjective list based solely upon the authors perceptions. The facts they state are incorrect and were not used in a methodical way to arrive at their fault conclusion. Incorrect fact #1 the cite Buffalo Unemplyment at 5.7% compared to Federal 4.3% when in fact the Federal Rate is 5.5%. Why were cities such as Tampa with an unemployment rate in excess of 6.3% and a loss of 23,000 jobs over the past year not included but Buffalo with a rate of 5.7% and a JOB GAIN of 3,800 over that same year included?
Is it based upon population loss? Forbes said Buffalo lost 42,000 people over the past 7 years yet the Census Bureau (whose estimates were proven to be way low in 2000) pegs the loss at 33,000? Why did Forbes lie about the population loss and unemployment rates?
If population loss was the key indicator why was Pittsburgh with an estimated loss in excess of 90,000 over the same period and the highest percentage loss in the nation not on the list yet Scranton with a slight population gain on the list.
The whole article seems like there was no real research done at all.
The one thing common among all the dying cities in the article is that they have all been lead by democrats for the past decade. Coincidence?