Salon: Milwaukee is the new Portland

[JoeMusashi]

Steely Dan wasn't too far off the mark in regards to the uphill climb cities like Milwaukee have to overcome. Race, sadly, has played a major role in the downfall of many of our cities. White flight, suburbanization, and racism hollowed out our communities; destructive social problems within the black community are keeping others out. Portland was, more than likely, spared this dilemma. And for the most part---so was Milwaukee. Despite this, we still have areas that are bordering on the Third World (infant mortality, in particular) and perhaps one of the most violent ghettos in the country. These things continue to poison the appeal of swaths of the city to prospective residents. It also creates problems in the school system and there isn't another thing that scares young people with children than this.

Milwaukee's politics are also an issue. The relationship between the Democrats in the city and the Republican suburbs can best be described as an arch-rivalry. The relationship with the rest of the state and Madison is also strained. Transit improvements are a virtual impossibility. We have had a few projects killed purely out of spite. Milwaukee has a few extremely influential talk radio hosts that rile up the suburbs and prompt legislators to abort transit projects. City/County leadership must often contend with fellow Democrats with their often horrible agendas. We have environmentalists, union activists, loud mouthed aldermen, and racial/social agitators making noise. Public feuds with the County Sheriff and the Executive, Mayor, and Police Chief.

Despite all this, Milwaukee has done a pretty good job and I think we are headed in a right direction. The city is fortunate to have retained much of its business, population, architecture, cultural institutions, and wealth.

[James Bond Agent 007]

Was reading this article and it has a long section on Milwaukee. In a 5-year span, the teenage birth rate in Milwaukee fell by 50%!

About halfway through the article (which is mostly off-topic but I thought the part on Milwaukee was pertinent here). Should bode well for the nearish-term future of Milwaukee, given that kids born to teenage mothers typically grow up to be problematic, not to mention the girls themselves struggle. Let's hope the trend keeps up!

The mystery of the falling teen birth rate

The sex ed theory

In 2008, Milwaukee set a very specific, and somewhat outlandish, goal.

Milwaukee announced that would cut its teen birth rate by 46 percent by 2015. The target was calculated: at the time, Milwaukee had the second-highest teen birth rate of any city, after Baltimore. It would need to reduce the rate by 46 percent, epidemiologists estimated, to get off the top ten list.

"I remember a conversation I had after we announced the target and had other people working on the campaign asking me, are you nuts?" said Bevan Baker, Milwaukee's health commissioner. "It was an outrageous goal, but I think it's what helped keep us on target, that we were working towards something big."

What ultimately proved more outrageous is that Milwaukee beat its 46 percent goal two years early. Recent data revealed that the rate had declined by 50 percent in 2013. In the course of five years, the city cut its teen birth rate by half.

As to how it happened, Baker credits an all-hands-on-deck approach. The city and local businesses poured funds into the effort. They ran innovative ad campaigns, like one that featured teen boys with round, pregnant bellies and the tagline, "It shouldn't be any less disturbing when it's a girl." The local newspaper agreed to a partnership, running articles that underscored the severity of the problem.

The United Way of Greater Milwaukee began running pregnancy prevention classes with at-risk teens, using curriculums that had previously been shown to increase knowledge of contraceptives and reduce risky behaviors. Together, this ambitious approach coincided with a massive drop in the number of Milwaukee teens becoming moms — and suggests that it's possible that Milwaukee, and other cities, have gotten much better at addressing a large public health issue.

"I think we hit the timing of it really perfectly," Baker said. "I think you saw decades of public health research being put to work. And you also had this happening with the rise of social media, and all of a sudden we had new ways to spread messages and communicate."

It's hard to doubt that Milwaukee's campaign played a role in the city's especially rapid teen birth decline. These are the type of programs that tend to get credit in local news stories for reducing a particular location's teen birth rate, after intensive effort.

[...]

[JoeMusashi]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

There is more to a city's soul than just its built environment. Portland has all the crazy stuff; small independent businesses and people with side hobbies that add to local color.

Also I thought Portland had a lot of nice amenities which were particularly desirable and relevant to the middle class/family demographic as well as lower crime? At least in comparison to Milwaukee. Sorry I'm hopelessly sunbelt to think of these things, lol.

These things give actual meaning to a dense urban form, IMO. Gives people things they want to live in proximity to.

I think you need to spend more time in Milwaukee if you doubt this exists here. We might not have guys playing trumpets on bikes but the local culture is one of the strong points of living here. Milwaukee is very strong on community recreation, kids activities, sports, festivals, and public/outdoor gatherings. I can't stress enough how big of a deal that is here. There is a rich history in that regard with our German and socialist heritage.

A few links,

http://www.milwaukeerecreation.net
http://county.milwaukee.gov/Parks
http://www.milwaukeecountygolfcourses.com
http://www.sailingcenter.org/about.php
http://www.bradfordbeachjam.com/welcome.html
http://www.growingpower.org
http://www.oldgermanbeerhall.com/estabrook-beer garden/
http://www.milwaukeeturners.org/abou...waukee-turners
http://pointfishfryandaflick.com

[urbanadvocate]

Originally Posted by destroycreate

Sorry, but that statement is ridiculous. Most people who actively choose to live in Portland do so because of the open-minded culture, tolerance, and progressive values. Just because Portland doesn't have a large black population in no way makes it some sort of inherently racist city.

This might be true of Portland in the last few decades but the history of Oregon as a whole is quite contrary. It until recent history had some of the most strict "segregation" laws on the west coast--blacks were only allowed to rent in certain neighborhoods (hence the black neighborhoods in the northeast).

Heck, black people were not even allowed to establish themselves in the state until the 1940s! No wonder it is so white.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

which brings us to another point. if this were a blue collar dick measuring contest, portland is as blue balled as any other rusty midwest industrial town.

Good point. Old school Portland is as rusty as they come. Which, coincidentally, played into why it never had a significant black population either - it's economic prosperity, like those of the first wave of rust belt cities in New England was already on the wane when the great migration was occurring.

As for Milwaukee's hipsters being more blue collar & authentic or whatever, I'm going to assume that's because most such inhabitants in Milwaukee are locals, while Portland now attracts that dreaded demographic of young, white, middle-class suburbanites from across the country.

[Reverberation]

• Video Link

[MonkeyRonin]

Anyway, even just from checking it out on Bing Maps, Milwaukee looks pretty cool. Though my bet is still on Pittsburgh to be America's next big urban darling.


(which is what they mean by "next Portland", as opposed to actually resembling Portland)

[JoeMusashi]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Anyway, even just from checking it out on Bing Maps, Milwaukee looks pretty cool. Though my bet is still on Pittsburgh to be America's next big urban darling.


(which is what they mean by "next Portland", as opposed to actually resembling Portland)

Pittsburgh is probably a more apt comparison to Milwaukee than Portland.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

if this were a blue collar dick measuring contest, portland is as blue balled as any other rusty midwest industrial town.

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Good point. Old school Portland is as rusty as they come. Which, coincidentally, played into why it never had a significant black population either - it's economic prosperity, like those of the first wave of rust belt cities in New England was already on the wane when the great migration was occurring.

Yeah... uh no, not really... actually, not even close... be thankful that it's not.

And the theory about the lack of significant black population and Portland's comparison with New England rust belt cities... whoa... that's some damn fine heavy bullshit you just came up with!

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

And the theory about the lack of significant black population and Portland's comparison with New England rust belt cities... whoa... that's some damn fine heavy bullshit you just came up with!

You'll have to excuse my lack of comprehensive knowledge of Portland's economic history, so I might be a little off here, but it was my understanding that Portland's economy wasn't particularly...vibrant for most of the 20th century. If this is correct, then it would be similar to much of New England, which peaked in the first two decades of the century and began to decline or stagnate by the 1920s. Presumably for this reason, black migrants that were leaving the South at this time would not be attracted to once booming industrial centres like Lowell, Springfield, and Manchester the way previous generations of European and French Canadian immigrants were; and instead have headed to the then prosperous industrial heartland of the Midwest. And hence, cities like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee now have larger black populations. The timing of economic trends with migration patterns is one of the most important factors in forming a city's ethnic composition.

I know there were also certain segregation laws at play in Oregon, however.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Good point. Old school Portland is as rusty as they come. Which, coincidentally, played into why it never had a significant black population either - it's economic prosperity, like those of the first wave of rust belt cities in New England was already on the wane when the great migration was occurring.

Eh, I don't think so. Not according to pdxtex anyway...

Originally Posted by pdxtex

which brings us to another point. if this were a blue collar dick measuring contest, portland is as blue balled as any other rusty midwest industrial town. we build boats, ships, trucks, aerospace crap, planes, ship grains, import cars (we have a large working seaport, really!). high tech out on the west side and all sorts of other junk going on. unlike the youngstowns, pittsburgh, or detroits, its traditionally been a very diversified industrial economy, that diversity is probably why the economy never tanked en masse. there was a slowdown in the timber industry in 80's but those losses have long been absorbed., so its not just shell art, thick rims glasses and chickens named collin. but we have that stuff too.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

if this were a blue collar dick measuring contest, portland is as blue balled as any other rusty midwest industrial town.

eh, i don't know if i'd quite agree with that. milwaukee really is especially oriented towards manufacturing in a way that few other US cities are.

i can only find state stats, but oregon (while still having a higher than national average manufacturing workforce) is not as heavily oriented towards manufacturing as wisconsin. and considering portland and milwaukee are the two alpha cities of their respective states, i would expect the percentages to fall into similar ranges for the metro areas.




The Top 20 US states by % of non-farm labor force in the manufacturing sector:

1. Indiana - 16.8%
   
2. Wisconsin - 16.3%
3. Iowa - 14.0%
4. Michigan - 13.5%
5. Alabama - 13.1%
6. Arkansas - 12.9%
7. Ohio - 12.6%
8. Kentucky - 12.4%
9. Mississippi - 12.3%
10. Kansas - 11.9%
11. South Carolina - 11.7%
12. Tennessee - 11.5%
13. Minnesota - 11.1%
14. North carolina - 10.9%
    
15. Oregon - 10.4%
16. New Hampshire - 10.3%
17. Vermont - 10.3%
18. Illinois - 10.0%
19. Connecticut - 9.9%
20. South Dakota - 9.9%
    
    
    

source: http://www.nam.org/~/media/6A62983CF...t_20140606.pdf

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

You'll have to excuse my lack of comprehensive knowledge of Portland's economic history, so I might be a little off here, but it was my understanding that Portland's economy wasn't particularly...vibrant for most of the 20th century. If this is correct, then it would be similar to much of New England, which peaked in the first two decades of the century and began to decline or stagnate by the 1920s. Presumably for this reason, black migrants that were leaving the South at this time would not be attracted to once booming industrial centres like Lowell, Springfield, and Manchester the way previous generations of European and French Canadian immigrants were; and instead have headed to the then prosperous industrial heartland of the Midwest. And hence, cities like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee now have larger black populations. The timing of economic trends with migration patterns is one of the most important factors in forming a city's ethnic composition.

I know there were also certain segregation laws at play in Oregon, however.

I was really just messin with you. It's an interesting theory, though geography played the greatest factor in Southern Black migration to points north at that time. Comparing Portland's Southern Black migration situation (or lack of it) with early European immigration to very old New England mill towns is really quite a stretch -- not that it's not interesting, but really more of an academic exercise which can serve to bring up much more substantive information.

Portland is a much newer city (was very remote and had far less established industries at the time) and followed the same path as other West Coast cities did in terms of Southern Black migration... it was a later wave, and most settled in California... again due to geographic distance and more established and industrially-robust cities.

[pdxtex]

my greater point was portland is not what id call a hot bed for traditional white collar jobs, people here seem to make a living doing things with their hands. services, industry, design and engineering, hospitality, health care....

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

milwaukie has an awesome lake, some great northside density, proximity to chicago and the brewers! all of which is awesome but i dont see alot of similarities between our two cities.

Minor correction, don't confuse Milwaukee with Chicago. Milwaukee has as much, if not more, density on the South Side as it does on the North side and neither side of the city is impoverished. In fact, one might say that the North side of Milwaukee is the center of all of the city's social ills. The Northwest side of Milwaukee is vast and stretches all the way to the NW corner of the county. Much of that part of the city is relatively low density, high crime, high poverty, semi-suburban ghetto.

The South Side of Milwaukee (Read the 5th ward and Bay View) are literal hipster paradises and some of the most gentrified portions of the city. Why is this? Because the far South side and portions of the Southwest side of the city are still mainly blue collar, middle class, whites unlike in Chicago where it is 90%+ impoverished blacks. The Southwest side of the city is, like Chicago, the Hispanic population center. Anyhow, the point is, Milwaukee's South Side is actually denser and in better shape demographically than most of it's Northside which is the opposite case from Chicago. Though Milwaukee's North Shore is basically Lake Forest transplanted into the locational equivalent of Roger's Park and Evanston.

[Chef]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

If you think Portland has "all the crazy stuff"... old blue collar cities like Milwaukee has all the crazy stuff in spades.

LouisVanDerWright stated it very well above... "Out of their blue collar base, Milwaukee seems to have developed a more genuine "hipster" culture where that 25 year old on the corner wearing flannel might actually be employed in a factory and hunt on the weekend."

Been to Portland numerous times quite recently... vibe I get: white middle class suburban kids, lots of cool stuff going on... but a somewhat self-conscious, manufactured cool that's not quite inherent to the place... like those people with side hobbies...

... in Portland playing the accordion on the sidewalk in the afternoon before you go to your blacksmith co-op to learn how to forge antique-style farming tools is seen as "cool". In a city like Milwaukee, you play the accordion because you learned how to play it at age 4 at the Polish Falcons Club while your dad got blitzed on shots of whisky and quarter drafts, and you know how to handle a hammer, oven, and anvil because 3 generations of men in your family before you slaved away in a fucking foundry, forge, or mill.

The problem with this notion is that Portland is full of transplants from the Midwest. A "real" hipster from Milwaukee or Cleveland doesn't suddenly become a fake trust fund hipster when they move to Portland. What we have here is a battle of inaccurate stereotypes.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by Chef

The problem with this notion is that Portland is full of transplants from the Midwest. A "real" hipster from Milwaukee or Cleveland doesn't suddenly become a fake trust fund hipster when they move to Portland. What we have here is a battle of inaccurate stereotypes.

My notion is actually nothing of the sort. That certainly is not the impression that I've gotten when I have been in Portland -- it seemed to me that most people there were from the Pacific Northwest, and many California transplants... and I didn't even consider economic status, whether trust fund or barely scraping by.

And real or fake hipster never enters into it for me... only that what things I've seen the "hipsters" of Portland seem to desire to emulate because there is a certain perceived quirky, off-beat coolness to it (and Portland certainly isn't alone in this category), are those things which are and have long been quite often completely normal, mundane things in a city like Milwaukee... without that level of self-conscious, affected, and forced originality to it.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Though Milwaukee's North Shore is basically Lake Forest transplanted into the locational equivalent of Roger's Park and Evanston.

milwaukee's north shore burbs are actually even closer in than that. shorewood starts at edgewood avenue which is only ~3 miles north of downtown milwaukee, which in a chicago context would be roughly the equivalent of lincoln park's distance to the loop. it always struck me as surprising how quickly milwaukee's north lake shore transitions from downtown to city neighborhoods to full on upscale suburbia.

in my mind i feel like shorewood is kinda like the wilmette of milwaukee, except that shorewood is only 3 miles north of downtown milwaukee whereas as wilmette is 13 miles north of downtown chicago. the scales are so wildly different.

[nei]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

You'll have to excuse my lack of comprehensive knowledge of Portland's economic history, so I might be a little off here, but it was my understanding that Portland's economy wasn't particularly...vibrant for most of the 20th century. If this is correct, then it would be similar to much of New England, which peaked in the first two decades of the century and began to decline or stagnate by the 1920s. Presumably for this reason, black migrants that were leaving the South at this time would not be attracted to once booming industrial centres like Lowell, Springfield, and Manchester the way previous generations of European and French Canadian immigrants were; and instead have headed to the then prosperous industrial heartland of the Midwest. And hence, cities like St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee now have larger black populations. The timing of economic trends with migration patterns is one of the most important factors in forming a city's ethnic composition.

I know there were also certain segregation laws at play in Oregon, however.

Lowell and Manchester are relatively small cities, and yes have smaller minority populations. Springfield, Hartford and Providence have similar non-hispanic white % than St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee. The overall population decline was smaller (except compared to Milwaukee), however. The black population is smaller in the New England cities (though Pittsburgh's isn't that big) but what about hispanics? All of those cities have large inner-city, rather poor inner-city hispanic populations.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by destroycreate

Sorry, but that statement is ridiculous. Most people who actively choose to live in Portland do so because of the open-minded culture, tolerance, and progressive values. Just because Portland doesn't have a large black population in no way makes it some sort of inherently racist city.

^ I love it how white people in majority white cities balk at the notion that they could possibly be racist.

Insert about a million black migrants from the deep south over the course of 20 years wanting to live next door to you, and lets test who's really "open-minded" and who isn't.

I don't get why some people have any sort of problem with what Steely Dan has been saying. What he's saying is as spot on true as a bullet between your eyes, actually...but perhaps people who have always lived in West Coast cities like Portland just haven't had the exposure to know what he has talking about. Milwaukee like pretty much ALL older Great Lakes industrial cities has a huge portion of the city occupied by lower income African Americans and these areas of town are plagued by poverty, disinvestment, crime, and gangs, and the need for expensive social services that taxpayers are increasingly loathe to pay for.

THAT'S the difference. Portland doesn't have that problem. Milwaukee does. It's not a small difference, it's a monumental difference. Milwaukee has to deal with this not only as an economic problem, but a moral one. It's a moral burden--if you try to help you spend shitloads of money and raise taxes, driving more people to the suburbs. If you don't help, labels of "racist" get tossed around. Portland doesn't have to deal with any of this: it gets to focus on brewing beer, growing facial hair, and latching onto the next big "smart growth" initiative.