Philadelphia was once the world’s capital of freedom. The Constitution, an ultimate authority for our government, was written there, and Independence Hall served as the nation’s capital in its early years.
Nowadays, Philadelphia is one of the weakest major cities in the United States. Violent crime and poverty rates are significantly higher than average, innovation and new industry sectors are virtually non-existent, and economic growth has stagnated.
Simply, we are falling behind, and the local government has done little to address the numerous endemic challenges plaguing the city.
Philadelphia suffers most from the aftermath of redlining, a system formalized in the 1930s where federal agencies and banks denied mortgages or insurance to people in certain neighborhoods, largely based on race.
Redlined areas with populations primarily made up of African-Americans and first-generation immigrants were neglected by the city for decades. Infrastructure crumbled, schools and hospitals underperformed, and families living in these areas were presented with little opportunity for economic mobility.
Failure to invest in these areas has led to several problems. Many redlined areas still have poverty rates exceeding 40%, and few people in these areas have access to high-quality healthcare. Modern-day shootings correlate strongly with historical redlined boundaries.
Houses for families in formerly “greenlined” areas became more and more valuable, but families in redlined zones were left behind. When driving through certain parts of Philadelphia, it is painfully apparent which neighborhoods were redlined and which were greenlined.
Although a few programs have been sponsored by the city to tackle the aftermath of redlining, they have largely come up short. Schools in redlined areas are still severely underfunded; the lack of intergenerational wealth and home value has been left unaddressed, and the lack of a robust public transportation system in these areas has made upward mobility careers inaccessible for many.
Compared to other formerly redlined major cities, Philadelphia’s struggles are clear. Boston has successfully implemented equity-focused transit and housing programs that explicitly target redlined areas to provide public transportation, healthcare, and housing.
New York City’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) program has made it so that 30% of houses in areas being rezoned for housing development are considered affordable. Many of these programs are targeted at formerly redlined areas.
Several cities have established multiple community land trusts in formerly redlined areas, giving power back to the people living there. Philadelphia’s programs pale in comparison.
For much of the 20th century, Philadelphia was an industrial powerhouse. However, when factories went overseas and shipping moved elsewhere, Philadelphia struggled to reinvent itself in the way that Boston and New York City did.
Today, while these cities are widely recognized as global hubs of innovation and industry, Philadelphia remains defined by a slower economic transition.
Boston capitalizes on its elite universities, such as MIT and Harvard, to build one of the strongest biotechnology and life sciences clusters in the world. The city is a magnet for startups, venture capital, and high-paying industries. AI, pharmaceuticals, and medicine all have a clear footing there.
The local government has used advantages such as its higher education sector to foster an ecosystem that encourages companies to stay and grow in the region.
New York City has followed a similar pattern of reinvention. They have maintained their footing in finance through Wall Street, but they have also become a leader in media, tech, fashion, healthcare, and green energy innovation.
Aggressive investment in innovation districts such as Silicon Alley, combined with consistent business from across the world, has allowed New York to become a global powerhouse.
Philadelphia has struggled to make the same leap. Despite being home to top universities such as Penn, Drexel, and Temple, the city has failed to translate academic research into large-scale private sector growth.
Venture capital investment in Philadelphia lags dramatically behind Boston and New York. In fact, Boston attracts nearly ten times more startup funding per capita. Software and biotech, while present and stable in Philadelphia, have not generated widespread prosperity.
Instead, many of the jobs in these sectors are lower-paying and concentrated in narrow fields, leaving much of the workforce excluded.
Philadelphia’s struggles with poverty, crime, and stagnant growth cannot be understood without looking at both the lasting legacy of redlining and the lack of an innovation-based economy.
Decades of disinvestment in these areas have led to a 23% poverty rate, the highest in all major cities in the United States. This feeds into the cycle of violent crime, weak consumer spending, and limited upward mobility.
Many of Philadelphia’s formerly redlined areas overlap with the highest-poverty and highest-crime areas, such as North Philadelphia and Kensington.
In the modern economy, innovation is the driver of job creation. Cities that have successfully transitioned into innovation hubs have seen dramatic gains in wealth and quality of life.
More innovation and venture capital investment lead to higher-paying jobs, expand the tax base, and reduce poverty by creating opportunities in supporting industries. Even people who are not college-educated still have a place in an innovative economy.
Philadelphia has yet to commercialize research and build large-scale industries. This lack of innovation-driven growth has added to Philadelphia’s 23% poverty rate, a number that fuels all of Philadelphia’s chronic social challenges.
You must be logged in to post a comment.