This is the article from which the Unbiased America article came from. I don’t know how much clearer it can be.
But again......if you think and want us to believe that Chicago, Flint, New York, DC, etc don’t have “economic, blight, and crime issues” then you’re blind, and destroying your own argument. If everything is fine in these dumpster fire of Democratic leadership, then we don’t need to “redistribute wealth”, “get guns off the street”, “give voices to the oppressed”. You can’t have it both ways.
https://wallethub.com/edu/best-run-cities/22869/#main-findings
You do not assess the legitimate criticisms that have been pointed at your “source” ie some guy’s opinion on Facebook.
And to put it simply, ignoring every other aspect that I’ve already mentioned, it’s like you think these are apples to apples here. Do you know why DC has so many black people in the first place? Because all the rich slave owners and land owners populated the suburbs and rural areas in the DMV area. Federal jobs offered slaves an opportunity to make it, and not at the hands of their former “owners.”
Democrats in the south, in the hundreds of years that you’re talking about, were your people. We didn’t see the most recent full switcheroo until the 70s/80s. So I’m not really sure why you’re expect city centers (where historically poor people live) to be a concern of a bunch of racist white people.
And then you’re off comparing it to other “cities” that aren’t cities at all.
Bottom line: you can count the number of cities on one hand that aren’t democrat holdings. Government jobs, affordable housing, etc. have been historically provided by federalism. Cities also attract homeless people. It’s where trade happens. It’s where people are.
You’re painting the picture as though federalism is causing people to be poor and live in the city. You’re ignoring history, and ignoring what urbanization even is. The ills of it. It naturally serves that the bigger a city is, the more of the rich and the poor you will see.
The masses don’t want to vote for a Republican today because the Republican platform is about taking away their entitlement benefits and alleviating taxes on people who have more money. The democratic platform is about keeping those taxes (or in some cases adding more) in order to raise the floor.
I definitely think that there comes a certain point where it’s not all about money. Some of it is society and culture. Some people are born into poverty and stay in poverty, even with opportunity. To that, there’s not much you can do in a single presidency. It’s generational. Society needs to change. But we do need to ensure OPPORTUNITY is equal. And it’s not, and republicans are more concerned with rewarding those who may have already worked hard instead of ensuring that those who are working hard can be rewarded.