It reads like a parody of itself, but I think the main issue is what counts as a "success." They say the Threat Management Center is successful in a way that implies that it's decreased crime in Detroit, when all that success actually means is that they're getting more customers. (This article says Detroit's homicide rate is one of the worst in the nation, and has been steadily increasing over the years.)

I can't speak to the bus service, but the framing is similar. "Here's a great business that stepped in to fill a void! And it's successful!" But the business being financially successful doesn't mean that the void is actually filled, if that makes sense. I think that's what makes the article tricky -- it's conflating successful businesses with successfully-solved problems, but those problems (like crime) are getting worse, not better.

"The spontaneous order, civic cooperation, and peaceful market forces that take over when government simply isn't around."

I'm not from Detroit; but phrases like that read like puff pieces.

That article leaves a lot suspiciously unsaid.

It's a transparently biased piece that begins by assuming its conclusion, cherrypicks its data, . I would't give it the time of day. There is a lot of wonderful reporting on Detroit out there, so there's no reason to read slanted garbage.

A very little exploration reveals the author's ideology.