Inside USA - Buffalo blues - 14 June 08 Part 1

[SaturnEternity]

The house at 4:57..... I lived down the street from it when I was a real little kid ._.

[Bottomless80Depths]

Really? There's a Tops in the heart of the east side with produce.

[payless1981]

I luv Buffalo!!! This video is only showing the bad side of the city (every city has one). They aren't showing the Theatre District, the Entertainment District, Hertel Ave. , Conneticut St. & Grant Street Revival, expanding Medial Campus, Main Street re-development (brining two way and traffic back to the pedestrian mall). The music scene, the ART scene (Buffalo has been voted the #1 Arts Destination by American Style Magazine two years in a row).

[rbe6f]

This is sad, I've never lived in the city itself, I'm from the suburbs (East Amherst) but I love where I'm from, and I wish we could turn Buffalo around. I go to college down at UVA and really want to work back in Buffalo but it's hard to find jobs. I'd like to start my own company and bring it back to Buffalo. Hopefully it could provide some jobs.

[littleMissTickles20]

i love the song at the beginning of these "inside USA" documentaries

[christianpfarner]

The mayer said we are in a boom He is a flat out lier he wants to make himself look good he is geting us further and further in debt all this new stuff they are puting up in the city is empty

[jgbaren]

If I had money and didn't have to work, I would love to move back to one of the old northern industrial cities just to get away from the overcrowded cesspool that is Florida.

[Scherer321]

to many taxes and Guv drive business away from buffalo, that is the main reason why we havent seen it develop

[Danimal14222]

Elmwood isn't the only area thriving. There's also Hertel, Allentown, Chippewa. There's neighborhoods in the Delaware corridor of Buffalo that have seen their value double in the last 10 years.

There IS major construction downtown: waterfront condos, New Era, the new Federal Courthouse. The Aud is finally torn down, the Canal Slip has opened.

Every city has its warts. For every Hollywood, there's a South Central. For every Riverdale, Bed-Stuy. Atlanta & Miami are dangerous too.

[SaturnEternity]

I'm from Buffalo :)

[italianirishman25]

people of buffalo take a damn stand NOW weve been dealing with bullshit too long its time for civil disobedience!!!!

[buffalogal37]

Everytime you turn around money came up missing at city hall, main place mall still is abandoned and all they can talk about is a casino, and a bait and tackle shop at the erie basin marina once again cartering to the people with money. Still the street are full of crime, and no body wants to live in crime areas. If you ask me they need to get the army reservists on the streets of buffalo clean it up then rebuilt, making a place liveble does not start with a new building.

[buffalogal37]

I am a native Buffaloian born and raised I am sadden that I may not come back. The major thing in all this is to remember alll this stuff was going on way before Byron Brown became mayor. Back in the late 1980's home owners started to flee to outshirt areas and leaving there homes as rentals, The train that goes no where and The Galleria mall, were ALL good decisions for those people coming into the city, but NO plans were made those left behind. Gieco even went to suburb when jobs did come.

[payless1981]

For every new development something old is torn down for surface parking. WOW!! Why not just turn the entire city into one big suburb

[teermusk]

I read all the comments. I would like to say that we are the poorest city in the u.s so what boom is he talkin bout? The whites up here are racist as hell. Anybody from the hood know not to even ride thru Kenmore. The Bills went to the superbowl 4x in a row & didnt win,this city aint gonna never be shit but i love this city. If this city ever gets better it will not be in my life time. Tearing down houses, wow we ,Bass Pro wow we.

[payless1981]

Totally agree, that's why I moved out of Buffalo last year back to NYC where noone gives a sh*& what and where you're from and if something gets torn down, it's because something bigger and better is goig to replace it.

[payless1981]

Buffalo is very depressing, all you have to do is visit the empty streets of Downtown on any given day and see the all the vacant store fronts and empty streets. It looks and feels like the set of "I Am Legend" Buffalo style.

[adeart7]

is Buffalo as bad as detroit, or flint michigan?

[alasiasmith14]

DO U EVN LIVE IN BUFFALO??

[ThePastIsNothing]

in what terms, my friend?

[alasiasmith14]

NO IT DONT!??

[nerdycub]

Buffalo, NY is iconic to what is happening to all of NY that is not New York City.

I was raised in Henderson Harbor NY. I went back for my mothers birthday. My friends are homeless and houses on Harbor view road look like they were condemned.

People think NY state is NYC but its not. The rest of New York state is broke. The Saint Lawrence Seaway is the 3rd poorest economic district in all of the United States.

It pains me to see my hometown looking like that.

[run19dmc]

This video is way too negative it gives buffalo a bad name its def not what the city needs the city is on the rise and is doing good right now especially now that the Canadians are spending their money here for once LETS GO BUFFALO!!!!! ill never leave again best city period!

[jesseinmontana]

I'm back in Buffalo after 15 yrs. away and damn I missed it. This vid is overly pessimistic. It ain't perfect but it is my city and I love it. Go Sabres!!

[palavocat]

As a former resident of the suburbs of Buffalo, I remember how depressing everything was before I left 7 years ago. Although it is still my hometown, I know that I could never live there again because there is just hardly anything there for decent jobs anymore. The younger people that are still insisting on living there are bascially travelling down a dead end road. I am glad I left when I did. The only things missed are the food and the faster pace than in the south where I am now.

[Bills11johnson]

Good video, but too pessimistic. As bleak as the city is, too much focused on negative aspects. I think some mention should have been made about the Medical Campus spreading through downtown and the East Side. That is what is truly bringing real jobs and development downtown. Also some of the developments like the Sycamore Village. People who only see this video would never come to Buffalo. What about Hertel, Parkside, South Buffalo, or Allentown? Mix the bad with some good.

[rachel102029]

i used to live in buffalo 8 years ago... just on my block there was 3 boarded up houses...i miss it though... i would move back if i could make money there. i love buffalo though :(

[altoflaco]

Inside USA is a huge discovery for me. What a great program. I took two years of Arabic recently and I'm daunted by regular Al-Jazeera, even though I knew they were much more unbiased and unafraid than many US news stations. So Al-Jazeera English is perfect. The programs of Inside USA about Latin America reflected most of what I've been reading lately on my own the last couple of years, so check them out.

[BFDBuff]

Mayor Byron W. Brown seems to be doing his part to boost Buffalo. Now if he can gt a handle on the doings of the BFD ! It seems he's not keping track of or being keep in the dark about the "Political Witch Hunts" taking place . In the long run th taxpayers will foot th bills generated from the lawsuits that are festering because of Admin actions. I support his efforts - but as they say,"Politic's make strange bed fellows" Good luck Mayor Brown - keep building that waterfront-looks encouraging!

[knowitx]

You can get anywhere you ever need to go, in less then 10 minutes. Even at $10.00 per gallon, Buffalo is WAY ahead of the Atlanta's' of this nation. Buffalo has something like no other place, Buffalo has a SOUL. Buffalo is a piece of Heaven on earth. Buffalo has MILD winters, when compared to Chicago! Buffalo has one of the finest Universities in the WORLD! With a med school, engineering school, you name it, all as good as the best. Power to the People of Buffalo! There is no place like home!

[amareto35]

The Land of opportunity haa?

Bush I have an advice for you:

Clean your cities before you clean others.

[1knitCap]

Who's foolin who - just look at who's getting paid ! The Mayor has a good out look - but he has to fight through years of taxes feeding special interests groups. Taxes should not be used to subsidized the afluent developers.

[knowitx]

You can get anywhere you ever need to go, in less then 10 minutes. Even at $10.00 per gallon, Buffalo is WAY ahead of the Atlanta's' of this nation. Buffalo has something like no other place, Buffalo has a SOUL. Buffalo is a piece of Heaven on earth. Buffalo has MILD winters, when compared to Chicago! Buffalo has one of the finest Universities in the WORLD! With a med school, engineering school, you name it, all as good as the best. Power to the People of Buffalo! There is no place like home!

[cusedogg18]

agreed!

[smithysmat]

Buffalo is coming back though.

[Tiburon1724]

yeah that poor woman who has to live with her adult sons...they are so poor they have a rock band drum set in the corner of the living room. Give me a break. And the garbageman is having money problems - can't pay that cable bill! Yeah cable is important for survival!

[Renegen1]

"the destruction of the houses as an attempt to add value to the system."

I think I spoke of this twice already. The destruction doesn't add value. It's the future use of the land that will add value, god.

The owner BTW is the bank, and the bank is not a landlord, it saw the best way to sell its land by clearing it of the house. Once the land is sold it will be used for something better than just standing on the bank's balance sheet.

[lastnymleft]

"The destruction doesn't add value. It's the future use of the land that will add value"

The net sum of that added value equals the opportunity cost of the money being spent elsewhere, on market-determined things. Less the cost of destruction.

At some point the houses will be rebuilt. 5000 houses x $100,000/house. $500 Million + $20 Million for demolition, deliberately directed into the re-construction industry that could have been spent otherwise furthering that community, productively.

[Renegen1]

You make it sound as if the money is finite, and that's understandable given the fact your theories come from the era of the gold standard. What do you propose instead, to let the market construct restaurants and other businesses at the very edge of the city so as to not destroy the precious houses for fear they might fill a future demand? Both the houses and the small businesses will be inneficient and the money lost on them. When we will need houses we will borrow(=create) money from a bank.

[lastnymleft]

"What do you propose instead"

Let the market operate naturally, without government interference

"..to let the market construct restaurants and other businesses at the very edge of the city so as to not destroy the precious houses for fear they might fill a future demand"

Don't be silly. The market can build wherever the hell it determines it wants to

"When we will need houses we will borrow(=create) money from a bank"

What could that money be doing otherwise? THAT'S the point!

[Renegen1]

Really! at no matter the price. We didn't hear anyone object to destroy the house and clear the land for something else. The speculators who might have bought the house foreclosed maybe thought they'd make more money by buying the land and offering it for developers but they didn't purchase the house. And it's fun how you say nothing is relevant and go back to your pretty theories.

[lastnymleft]

"it's fun how you say nothing is relevant and go back to your pretty theories"

Because you are not speaking to the point at hand. The point being, should houses be destroyed as a way to boost the economy? ie the broken glass fallacy

You prattle on about everything leading UP TO the breaking of the glass without addressing any of the points in the fallacy itself:

(1) the breaking of the window,

(2) the glazier's business, or

(3) the opportunity cost of the money had it not been spent on (2)

[lastnymleft]

"Really! at no matter the price. We didn't hear anyone object to destroy the house and clear the land for something else."

The market WOULD and taxpayers SHOULD object.

(1) The value of the vacant blocks is the value of land LESS the cost of destruction

(2) The value of a built block is the value of the land PLUS the cost of building a house

That (2)>(1) is not in doubt. The issue is that they decided to overlook that, in order to create jobs in the construction industry. That is fallacious.

[Renegen1]

I'm not quite sure what value you speak of with those houses, no one wanted to buy them. Do you get that through your thick skull? No one wanted to buy them. The only value the houses had were scrap value. The land however can quickly be put to use. If a person bought the house for more, he'd then have to pay even more to destroy the house, and that would be uneconomical so probably less developments would happen. Instead they wait for the land to be cleared before jumping in.

[lastnymleft]

"The land however can quickly be put to use."

By building glazier factories?

Why won't you answer this question?:

Is your restaurant more likely to open if the restauranter bought (1) a cheap house, or (2) an artificially expensive house?

[Renegen1]

As for why you're changing the argument, here is your quote. "Or it could have NOT been taxed, and left with the citizens, who, in CHEAP houses, would have spent it differently / more productively. Someone in a cheap house might start a little business"

What is this cheap house argument you brought forward? The house was godammed owned by the bank. And then you start about the owner starting a small business, what? In another part they were renovating a rundown house, these ones no one wanted

[lastnymleft]

That's not me changing my argument; that's you not understanding it

The houses could have sold at MARKET price. Is there more demand for artificially expensive houses?

Prudent potential buyers did not overgear themselves during the housing credit boom. Those people have real savings: that can (1) purchase affordable houses, or (2) Do (1) plus start a business

They are now being (a) excluded, or (b) forced to buy artificially expensive houses that reduce savings available for business creation

[Renegen1]

What the hell are you talking about. Do you have any understanding of what a foreclosed house is? Do you have any understand of what the point of foreclosure is? TO GET THE HOUSE OFF THE BALANCE SHEET. Foreclosures are typically bargain bins and still no one bought the house. You really don't get it do you.

[lastnymleft]

I clearly need your guidance to set me on the path to Truth. Explain to me where house foreclosures fit into the broken window analogy? Is it to do with:

(1) the breaking of the window,

(2) the glazier's business, or

(3) the opportunity cost of the money had it not been spent on (2)

?

Oh, and you seem to have overlooked enlightening me with your answer to this question:

Is your restaurant more likely to open if the restauranter bought (1) a cheap house, or (2) an artificially expensive house?

[Renegen1]

Is it up to you to explain to me how the house fits in your broken window analogy, given you've talked about the stupid glazier business many times over you can't even convert the theories to fit this particular case. You have this obsession saying the destruction costs precious money and that money shouldn't be wasted and the rich land in hot spots in the city should be left unproductive. Only the destruction WILL create the small business investment you speak of from the market.

[lastnymleft]

Sigh. Again:

1) the breaking of the window :: House destruction

2) the glazier's business :: Construction industry building on the vacant blocks

3) the opportunity cost of the money had it not been spent on (2) :: What would have been done with the money if houses left standing

The broken glass fallacy deals with the housing example from the point of their destruction. It shows that destroying them in the hopes of adding value is a fallacy. HOW they came to be abandoned is a separate issue

[anthonysiracuse]

you obviousely don't know what 20,000 homes abandoned and decaying in your city looks like.These homes have been empty and rotting for years and they breed crime. Many residents are tired of living in a city where every other hose is burnt down or falling down. The prior administration started tearing down houses in the old fruit belt in the same manner , there is now an entire neighborhood of brand new homes in its place , albeit the architecture doesn't blend with the rest of the neighborhood

[lastnymleft]

If the community makes those sorts of decisions, fair enough, but they shouldn't do it under the false illusion that it is going to be a net positive financially. It is a false economy. If they know that, and go into that willingly, accepting the losses that come with it, then so be it. Otherwise, it's just the taxpayer getting screwed again.

[Renegen1]

This will be possible where previously not possible because the empty lot will be a hot piece of land. Think about it, where can you build a new restaurant, or park, or office building, or shop? You can either purchase an old building and destroy it or build in suburbs. Every piece of land IN a city is already occupied. The empty land WILL create small businesses by providing cheap and accessible real estate for an aspiring businessman. Tell me again what the empty house was providing.

[lastnymleft]

R1: "Tell me again what the empty house was providing"

Either:

(1) Money being utilized elsewhere (building restaurants?), or

(2) excess-credit and malinvestment that make the problem worse NOT being created.

Neither of which you seem to be able to acknowledged as being real parts of the equation. You are part of the crowd saying "Your broken window will be good for the glazier! That vandal did the economy a service!". If you're as into economics as you say, you're going to need to look deeper.

[Renegen1]

Again I don't understand your point 1). The house was most likely bought sub prime, a loan was taken, the value of the house dropped and the buyer abandoned his mortgage instead of paying for it. The bank tried to foreclose the house but couldn't get anything. The money on the mortgage was lost. The buyer didn't lose any real money because he declared bankrupcy. The person hurt here is the bank. Really, what the hell are you talking about.

[lastnymleft]

None of that is relevant. All that is PRIOR to the case in point: the destruction of the houses as an attempt to add value to the system.

To address the broken window fallacy, you need to consider:

(1) the breaking of the window,

(2) the glazier's business, and

(3) the opportunity cost of the money had it not been spent on (2).

You flippantly wrote off the cost of (1), and totally ignore (3). Your argument is solely on (2) (ie in your case, the restaurant).

"at no matter the price"

Really?

[Tereeb11]

YES, GO down US economy.

YES, GO down US economy.

YES, GO down US economy.

The best news ever. With broken economy, you will keep your ass in the US and the world be safe from any interventions.

[lastnymleft]

Destroying houses to boost the economy? Umm...why don't they go around and break all the windows in Buffalo? They glass manufacturers will do well. Same logic.

They should be focusing on PRODUCTIVE uses of the money. Create tax breaks for business, and the most productive uses will spring up, creating GENUINE benefits.

[Renegen1]

Uh, they're destroying ABANDONNED houses that litter the landscape and aren't productive in any way. It's not houses that are worth anything, but the land underneath. Destroying the useless pile of wood on top of that land frees that land to be used for something productive.

[lastnymleft]

Renegen1: Like...houses?

My allusion to breaking of windows was very deliberate. The "broken window" theory of economics is well known...and well proven to be a fallacy.

Gooogle: "broken window" economics

or:

en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken­_window

[Renegen1]

I'll give it to you, I didn't hear about this fallacy before. But please connect this fallacy to the current example in the video. Those houses provided 0 of everything of every kind. They also hurt neighborhoods and potentially housing prices. Now say a restaurant gets built where that house used to be, that neighborhood will suddenly get more visitors and the existing businesses will all benefit. It's not like the abandoned house was going to be replaced by a new one.

[lastnymleft]

The money spent rebuilding would have been spent differently in the economy, and the money the gov spent on demolishing houses could have been spent on more efficiently on productive things. Or it could have NOT been taxed, and left with the citizens, who, in CHEAP houses, would have spent it differently / more productively. Someone in a cheap house might start a little business

Destroying houses props up housing prices at the expense of those that cannot afford to buy a house. Consider BOTH

[Renegen1]

Funny you changed your arguments. Btw, I don't want this to become vicious because YT is a terrible way to debate anything. It's really pathetic. So give me your email or a chat room if you know it and we'll talk there like adults. About the houses, how come they were abandoned? Obviously their low price didn't attract anyone. They were probably foreclosed and still no buyers. As for the tax argument, the only costs involved here are for the demolition! The restaurant WILL be a small business.

[lastnymleft]

renegen1: "Funny you changed your arguments"

Where? Don't just make accusations, support them.

"About the houses, how come they were abandoned? Obviously their low price didn't attract anyone"

If the market didn't have more to fall, attracting REAL buyers, they wouldn't be trying to prop the prices up by reducing supply. By propping prices up they ARE excluding buyers

Is your restaurant more likely to open if the restauranter bought (1) a cheap house, or (2) an artificially expensive house?

[Renegen1]

I don't understand your article here at all. The houses were abandoned, and as I said they were foreclosed most likely. They still remained abandoned. What crap do you give me about reducing supply, no one touched them! The buyers had their chance at no matter the price and they said no.

[Renegen1]

And like I said, it's the land that counts. The land can be used for anything that will provide value, and I don't mean in its construction, I mean in its use. Land is super important in an urban environment. Your fallacy pretty much sucks actually, poor logic.

[lastnymleft]

"Your fallacy pretty much sucks actually, poor logic"

It sustained 150 years of analysis from the greatest economic thinkers in history only for you to bring it down in 500 characters? Good one! A Nobel Prize surely awaits!

"The land can be used for anything that will provide value"

You are seeing only that which can be readily seen. You don't see that which cannot be readily seen. That's the whole point of the argument. Like a business plan that only considers the revenue and not the costs

[nickvanzetti]

Jews are different from Zionist!!! I'm sick of people thinking that those who criticize Zionist are anti-semetic. You cannot be a Jew if you are a Zionist.

[OperationOpera]

We have only Israel to blame for this. Damn zionists.

[xxashyy]

Good point. How many billions of dollars is Israel getting from the american tax payer? Not just Israel also Egypt. Foreign aid should be shut off for good.

[lastnymleft]

xxashyy: The Egyptians only get the foreign aid because they piggy-backed onto Israeli foreign aid, as part of the American taxpayers buying peace for Israel. Egypt gets a fixed 70% of whatever Israel gets (which has generally increased) - the best decision the Egyptians ever did.

[chicago251]

dude wtf. stop blaming jews and actually do something about it

[bulluni]

Thanks Bush for improving our standard of living these past few years ...

[Orion602]

It doesn't look like prosperous city.. no wonder people are leaving it - at least those who can afford to leave

[brick4sale]

It's never anybody's fault but America, right. You don't like this story don't watch it.

[EdyPegasus]

yes the wages are low and should be raised but all i am saying is that if you stop having the extras such as cellphones, cable, eating out, fast internet, etc. Use a cord phone, standard TV, get dial up or use a public library and learn how to cook it is a lot cheaper than even eating at McDonalds!

[EdyPegasus]

11:15 lol the cable bill, this is why this guy is "poor." Listen my family went through hard times. My dad was only working and earning only 27 k. It was like this for two years before my mother found a job. And you think that is not hard, my family is a family of 7. So that means 7 people living on 27 k a year. And we did not even use food stamps, coupons and we did not eat out. You can live off 19 k a year for a family of 4, it is not that hard.

[internationallawman]

Not to diminishwhat you are saying about your family, 27k or 19k are a lot less in 2008 than they were when you were a kid.

When I was a kid working for the city even as a sanitation worker was a decent living. Now its minimum wage.

That is why the guy is poor.

He's not "poor." He's poor.

You can't have a prosperous or even stable society when working people and their kids don't have a hope in hell of getting ahead.

[internationallawman]

No derk, you've got it wrong. When people call Dick Cheney "Darth Vader" they don't really mean he's an alien from outer space. It' a joke. Satire, if you will.

And it wasn't napalm that destroyed all those neighborhoods. It was just reckless financial speculation snd massive fraud. And it's only a few hundred neigborhoods that were devastated.

And it wasn't in amerika that so many women and children were killed. It was Iraq.

Of course it was pretty expensive to kill them.

Oh well.

[hakim01]

And yet we spend Billions each day in Iraq...

[OghamTheBold]

I didn't even know about the 'boomlist' - who do I bribe to get on it?

[AirelonTrading]

You cannot have growth without recession. There is no "fix". Its delusional to think you can fix anything with any politician or any plan. Its never worked. Capitalism works, because there are recessions. Its at least functional. Which is more than can be said of the other economies that have been attempted.

The best that can be done during periods of growth is to prepare yourself for the coming recession. Because there is no escaping it. For an economy to function - there MUST be recession.

[McSoustenfrugal]

You're delusional. This isn't capitalism its a corporate welfare system.

[brick4sale]

But nobody really prepares for a recession, at least not the poor that but into the idea they can move up.

[AirelonTrading]

Lord knows I've been preparing for it. For the last two decades Warren Buffett has been telling people to. That's how you gain wealth.

I came from a background of having nothing. My god, my whole family is from West Virginia. But there comes a point where you have to say: How can I more permanently improve my living conditions?

[ArtypNk]

Everything turning into big shit. Starving in america, who would say that 15 years ago?