AmrapinVA

Just quickly 'cause I don't want to change the subject but once you get past the Deleware Tpke. part of I-95 traffic lightens up quite a bit with all the NJ/NY traffic going towards the 295 Memorial Bridge Spur along with the 95/495 split just before Wilmington. I-95 gets bad around 376 in Chester and the Center City but traffic isn't horrific IMHO even from far off places like Newark. Maybe I'm just jaded from sitting in so much DC Beltway traffic though. As for Cleveland-Akron. Does it really matter? I think it's safe to say Cleveland-Akron-Canton and Cincinnati-Dayton should be considered one area even if they're officially not. Suburbs connect, lots of people live/work in different CSAs., etc. The idea of one "swallowing" the other is just an exercise in the abstract for now.

Starting May 3rd Frontier will be expanding ops to four destinations: Denver, Ft. Myers, Tampa and Orlando. Currently they are just flying to Orlando 4 times a week. Spirit will be back on May 5th with a flight to Orlando. For the first half of the month this flight will stop in Columbus to pick up more passengers on the outbound flight. I used to fly Cleveland-Columbus on Dash 8s back in the 90s on Continental Express. It's been a while since the two cities were linked up with air service. maybe a decade or so. Baby steps. Will see how all this works out.

It's not coincidence almost 100% of cities who want to be connected globally see investment in an airport as a benefit for their regions. Regionally: Columbus is expanding. Kansas City is basically getting a whole new airport Pittsburgh is updating their Terminal and Airside gates yet again Detroit and Indianapolis each have a modern palace LaGuardia and O'Hare are getting billion dollar face jobs. The global trend is not to go Cleveland's "status-quo" way.

Domestic Adds: Key business markets not served daily and year-round by Hopkins: Seattle, Portland, San Diego, San Jose and Kansas City. Austin? Florida is covered. There's work to be done.

The American exec quote says "premium seats" which makes sense as most of the flights to Kennedy and LaGuardia were small regional jets before United the Queens market. Now LaGuardia is on an a larger American aircraft. Overall seat growth though, not sure.

American also recently abandoned Cleveland-Kennedy plans so I'm not sure there's a net increase of seats for American at Cleveland. United is basically down to hubs and Florida. Will Florida be around once the Concourse D lease is up? I do wonder. There is room for Spirit and Frontier growth but Cleveland is not Orlando and at some point all the vacation destinations will be covered. Then what? Is the city asking these questions? Not sure.

Hopkins growth is mostly driven by the consolidation of low cost carriers moving from Akron-Canton to Hopkins. Most other de-hubbed cities didn't have this dynamic. It's a limited growth trajectory which will be nearing an end in the next year or two. City leaders need to start looking at new avenues for growth.

Somehow, the vast majority of European and Asian major cities have high-speed rail and modern efficient airports. Not quite sure why Cleveland has to abandon one for the other. I'm not saying you need to spend billions but the terminal facilities for both passengers and employees are dated. The customs facility is out of 1964. There's stuff to fix beyond the cosmetic which can't hurt the local economic engine.

I'm happy this is happening but I hope they use a better quality concrete compared to what they used to make Parma's sidewalks ADA compliant recently. The new curbs are crumbling pretty quickly.

Not a Boomer but I disagree about them not being aware of freebies. Their parents were the WWII/Depression generation. Their grandparents made the difficult transitions into a modern society or were part of the massive immigrant wave into this country. I'm sure stories were told to them of how good they have it. I know my grandparents had fascinating stories of difficulty. Western Millennials, OTOH, haven't really had a difficult road. Non-first world Millennials are a very different story. This is the most-wrong post I've ever seen on Urban Ohio and that says a lot. Boomers, both those on the national stage and those I know personally, are always going on and on about how easy millennials have it (see your second paragraph) and how hard they had it. "I worked my way through college and bought a house at 22" is such a common refrain it's become a cultural meme. Boomers don't put a second thought to the fact that college costs have inflated to the moon, and the minimum wage is lower now than it was in the 1960s. At the same time, they've left us crumbling infrastructure, underfunded schools, a warming planet---the list goes on and on. Because of the actions of the Boomers, Millennials and Gen Z will have a far worse life than their parents and grandparents. Western Boomers and Gen Xers have it easy too. Don't get me wrong. This being said: -- Have you had to leave your family in your home country at a young age because it offers no educational opportunities or employment? -- Have you travelled through countries illegally on foot and in disguise to get to a country with opportunities? -- When in this country do you work knowing at any moment you may be removed because you're not a permanent resident based on the idiotic actions of the host or your home government? -- Do you know your birthday and who your parents are? I work with a lot people who have truly called through global sh*t to get clean on the other side. So I am a little jaded to complaints of Western Millennials being dealt the worst hand of humanity ever. Just my wrong opinion, I guess. ;D Maybe I misunderstood your first post, but I feel like your second one is talking about something completely different. Yes, Millennials and Gen Z have it bad by modern American standards, and certainly worse than their parents and grandparents. Are there places in the world where their life would be immeasurably worse? Of course! I would never deny that. But the actions of Boomers have made the lives of their progeny worse. Also, to your points. I have not had to leave my home country at a young age, but I did have to leave my region because of a lack of educational and employment opportunities. Appalachian Ohio is worse off today than at any point in the second half of the 20th Century and living conditions mirror those in many developing countries. So I had to move 500 miles from my parents to find opportunity. Luckily, I'm now back in Ohio and closer to family--but there is still zero economic or educational opportunity for many kids in Appalachia. Similarly, I have not ever had to worry about being removed from this country but I know many Millennials who worry about that every day. Our government is intent on punishing these people for trying to come here and make a better life for themselves, even though many of them came as small children. I also know my birthday and who my parents are, but again, there are many, many children in this country that do not. I get your point, that life in this country is better than in many countries around the world. But our quality of life used to be near the top, and now we are painfully middling. You're thinking nationally, I'm thinking globally. I think it's our disconnect. I wasn't going to respond until you said my post was the worst ever! ;)

The Chinese are only "better" because GenXer activists were slaughtered en masse at Tiananmen Square and there now seems to be global amnesia of this event due to China mining all the important things for a smartphone to work. Now a Ponzi scheme is in place to keep everyone "happy". Their Boomers were under the thumb Chairman Mao. So that's an astoundingly low standard to start from as an example, IMHO. Why would we not be talking about global generations? We're human first, everything else second.

Not a Boomer but I disagree about them not being aware of freebies. Their parents were the WWII/Depression generation. Their grandparents made the difficult transitions into a modern society or were part of the massive immigrant wave into this country. I'm sure stories were told to them of how good they have it. I know my grandparents had fascinating stories of difficulty. Western Millennials, OTOH, haven't really had a difficult road. Non-first world Millennials are a very different story. This is the most-wrong post I've ever seen on Urban Ohio and that says a lot. Boomers, both those on the national stage and those I know personally, are always going on and on about how easy millennials have it (see your second paragraph) and how hard they had it. "I worked my way through college and bought a house at 22" is such a common refrain it's become a cultural meme. Boomers don't put a second thought to the fact that college costs have inflated to the moon, and the minimum wage is lower now than it was in the 1960s. At the same time, they've left us crumbling infrastructure, underfunded schools, a warming planet---the list goes on and on. Because of the actions of the Boomers, Millennials and Gen Z will have a far worse life than their parents and grandparents. Western Boomers and Gen Xers have it easy too. Don't get me wrong. This being said: -- Have you had to leave your family in your home country at a young age because it offers no educational opportunities or employment? -- Have you travelled through countries illegally on foot and in disguise to get to a country with opportunities? -- When in this country do you work knowing at any moment you may be removed because you're not a permanent resident based on the idiotic actions of the host or your home government? -- Do you know your birthday and who your parents are? I work with a lot people who have truly called through global sh*t to get clean on the other side. So I am a little jaded to complaints of Western Millennials being dealt the worst hand of humanity ever. Just my wrong opinion, I guess. ;D

Not a Boomer but I disagree about them not being aware of freebies. Their parents were the WWII/Depression generation. Their grandparents made the difficult transitions into a modern society or were part of the massive immigrant wave into this country. I'm sure stories were told to them of how good they have it. I know my grandparents had fascinating stories of difficulty. Western Millennials, OTOH, haven't really had a difficult road. Non-first world Millennials are a very different story.

I'm trying to debate with myself if 56 percent is a good or bad percentage. It means 44 percent are not supportive of immigrants. Was this number worse in the past? Or is there a neutral category that would make the non-supportive amount smaller? Why would I move to a community where 4 out of 10 neighbors didn't really want me there?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say with this post. Yes, of course Mexico and Puerto Rico are different places....? Maybe I am misunderstanding the point you're trying to make. I know that Cleveland's Latino community skews much more toward the Caribbean than Mexico, and that makes it a bit of an outlier in the Midwest. Cleveland does have a sizable Puerto Rican community, but the total population of Latinos is pretty small. Let's look at some numbers (2010 census data): Cleveland: 10% Latino 2010 population: 396,000 # of Latinos: 39,600 Columbus: 5.6% Hispanic (primary country of origin is Mexico) 2010 population: 787,000 # of Hispanics: 44,072 Cincinnati: 3% Hispanic (Mexico and Central American countries represent the most common countries of origin) 2010 population: 296,000 # of Hispanics: 8,800 (!) Milwaukee 17% Hispanic 2010 population: 594,000 # of Hispanics: 100,980 Indianapolis 10% Hispanic 2010 population: 820,000 # of Hispanics: 82,000 Now, I know that these numbers are almost a decade out of date, and I know enough about demographic trends to realize that many recent immigrants are bypassing urban cores, and living in suburban areas. In Cincinnati's case, the heart of the Hispanic community is in the northern suburbs, and the total community at the metro level is about 60,000 people strong, which isn't insignificant. I don't know if there are any lessons that can be learned from other cities about how to best attract immigrants, but there's no doubt that our cities could use the shot in the arm that immigrants can provide. I'm a bit of a demographics nerd, so I find this stuff endlessly interesting. Cleveland's MSA Hispanic population (without Akron) is almost 100k. Also, Cleveland 'burbs like Lorain and Painesville have plenty of non-PR families. It's not coincidence those cities' populations have stabilized and started growing again. That being said Cleveland and Cincy MSA's Hispanic percentage is below the national average. Ohio's larger cities, to me, are not very immigrant friendly with Columbus being the outlier. Even some denizens of these threads talk about having the "right" immigrants or getting buy-in from existing minorities before letting "outsiders" in. Meh.