Why Isn't Detroit Being Used As An Example??

[everoblivion2005]

So I don't understand why more people are not scared to hell at what is happening in Detroit and Chicago...

The same attitude towards policy and law making was used there over the past 50 years as is currently being used in DC.  Liberal politicians claiming to have the public's best interest at heart by giving them handouts and huge pensions and increasing Taxes on the "Wealthy".  So here's what happened, increasing taxes and operation costs on Big Business caused the big three to start opening plants in other states with friendlier taxes, Taxes increased on the "Wealthy" caused them to move to greener pastures (partly the cause of the 1 million+ person population drop over the past 50 yrs).  So what I'm seeing is that when Taxes increase to pay for govt run handout programs, people who have the means to leave do so, leaving those who are now reliant on these programs (and do not have the means to leave) without funding and driving the city into larger and larger deficits (sound familiar?).

So currently we are loosing immigrant Doctors at an alarming rate (I personally know 2 Indian DO's and 1 German MD who are returning to their birth countries and renouncing citizenship) and soon that is likely to follow suit with more American born doctors leaving for greener pastures.  This is just one area where we are loosing the "Wealthy" people (who are the ones who pay the rest of us) due to persecution from the government.

Reagan stated that the closest thing to becoming immortal is to create a government social program well that needs to change.  The government is bloated, overbearing, and frequently undermining our constitution.  The Current White House is a sham with so many scandals and conspiracies that the "Evil" GW would have been burned at the stake for them (But not good 'ol Barry).  If they have not already they will soon have lined their pockets enough to weather a complete fiscal collapse of the USA while we are left to flounder.  I dunno I am so fed up with this administration that I can barely watch the news anymore from fear of what they are doing next.

I think the Chicago and Detroit failures should be seen by everyone as an example of what happens when socialistic govt policies run the govt deficits through the roof because that is NOT the govt's debt.... it's OURS!

Edited August 16, 2013 by everoblivion2005

[magley64]

What types of conspiracies? You mean like "9/11 was an inside job" type conspiracies?

[grapesmuggler27]

Benghazi, NSA, fast and furious etc type of conspiracy. You know the ones that surround the current president not the one before him.

[everoblivion2005]

What types of conspiracies? You mean like "9/11 was an inside job" type conspiracies?

Haha typical.. one thing is picked out that is seen as arguable and the point is missed......

[Tonik]

 

Taxes increased on the "Wealthy" caused them to move to greener pastures (partly the cause of the 1 million+ person population drop over the past 50 yrs). 

 

 

Very little of the exodus had anything to do with taxes in Detroit. I was there when it started. It started when Detroit's Mayor went on TV and said  'If the white people don't like me they can move out'.  We were all WTF, ok cya. It was all racial man, the big hit was in the late 70's and early 80's. The black mayor pretty much declared war on white folk. I may get flamed, but that is what happened. You had to be there, it was amazing.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Tonik

[magley64]

Benghazi, NSA, fast and furious etc type of conspiracy. You know the ones that surround the current president not the one before him.

 

Those are conspiracies? Benghazi was an act of terror... i haven't heard anyone claiming that Obama conspired to make it happen (though they love to try to blame it on him on Faux Nuz).

Who is the NSA conspiring with? They are spies, they are spying...on everyone.

Fast and furious, really? what was the conspiracy? Who was conspiring?

 

Haha typical.. one thing is picked out that is seen as arguable and the point is missed......

 

Then make your fucking point and quit piling on bullshit just to fill space...

[everoblivion2005]

Very little of the exodus had anything to do with taxes in Detroit. I was there when it started. It started when Detroit's Mayor went on TV and said  'If the white people don't like me they can move out'.  We were all WTF, ok cya. It was all racial man, the big hit was in the late 70's and early 80's. The black mayor pretty much declared war on white folk. I may get flamed, but that is what happened. You had to be there, it was amazing.

Yes, that is why i stated "partly".  Thanks for including that part though.

 

Those are conspiracies? Benghazi was an act of terror... i haven't heard anyone claiming that Obama conspired to make it happen (though they love to try to blame it on him on Faux Nuz).

Who is the NSA conspiring with? They are spies, they are spying...on everyone.

Fast and furious, really? what was the conspiracy? Who was conspiring?

 

 

Then make your fucking point and quit piling on bullshit just to fill space...

conspiracy [kənˈspɪrəsɪ]

n pl -cies

1. a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal or harmful act, esp with political motivation; plot

2. the act of making such plans in secret

Once the Attack on Bengazi occured the White House Conspired to cover it up, once Snowden released the NSA documentation the White House Conspired to hide information and deny FOIA suits for the information, once Fast and Furious went south DC conspired to unlawfully protect those that were guilty.

[Tpoppa]

 

Then make your fucking point and quit piling on bullshit just to fill space...

 

That's like the super-duper-really-fucking-black-pot calling the kettle black.

[magley64]

conspiracy [kənˈspɪrəsɪ]

n pl -cies

1. a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal or harmful act, esp with political motivation; plot

2. the act of making such plans in secret

Once the Attack on Bengazi occured the White House Conspired to cover it up, once Snowden released the NSA documentation the White House Conspired to hide information and deny FOIA suits for the information, once Fast and Furious went south DC conspired to unlawfully protect those that were guilty.

 

Benghazi: yes, the best way to cover it up was to walk into the rose garden and announce it to the press... hell of a cover up!

NSA: Oh why would they want to keep secrets regarding national security? :eyeroll:

Fast and furious: protect those who were guilty of what?

[everoblivion2005]

Benghazi: yes, the best way to cover it up was to walk into the rose garden and announce it to the press... hell of a cover up!

NSA: Oh why would they want to keep secrets regarding national security? :eyeroll:

Fast and furious: protect those who were guilty of what?

Benghazi: Sept 12th: Loosely referred to as a terrorism, as the word "Terrorism" nor the phrase "ACT of terror" were used in the rhetoric simply a loosely applied phrase of "acts of terror".  From that point on it was refereed to as a Civilian riot gone bad and some stupid you tube video was blamed to instill the idea that nothing could have been done, there was no warning and no possible response team.  When in fact I personally know there were several "things" that could have been "done/deployed".  And even without my military knowledge the fact that several commanding officers have been relieved of duty for speaking out about the attack should be proof enough.  And proof in theory would be the White Houses refusal to Call Major Asshole's "Work Place Violence" an act of terror.

NSA: .......... Yea cause Clear Violations of the 4th amendment should be kept secret even after a court of experts declares it so and is silenced.

Fast And Furious: Holder... BS that he didn't hear about it till 2011

[magley64]

the word "Terrorism" nor the phrase "ACT of terror" were used in the rhetoric simply a loosely applied phrase of "acts of terror".

Really? "Acts of terror like these" is not saying "this was an act of terror"?

Idiots like you are all over fox news...(don't worry, by your own logic I didn't call you an idiot)

Edited August 16, 2013 by magley64

[everoblivion2005]

That's twice I've gotten to you. And twice you have perpetrated the same argument shortcut. I consider this argument over.

[magley64]

That's twice I've gotten to you. And twice you have perpetrated the same argument shortcut. I consider this argument over.

Lol, what do you mean you've "gotten to me"?

You can consider whatever you like, but that won't stop me from pointing out what you're shoveling is horse shit.

Edited August 17, 2013 by magley64

[baptizo]

Conspiracies?  Meh, maybe, but they're definitely scandalous and clear as day evidence of 0bama and his administration's disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law.  

[grapesmuggler27]

The cover up conspiracy whatever you want to call it with benghazi was the amount of information known before the attack. The cover up of asking for more security and then the president and mrs clinton acting like they knew nothing

[magley64]

The cover up conspiracy whatever you want to call it with benghazi was the amount of information known before the attack. The cover up of asking for more security and then the president and mrs clinton acting like they knew nothing

So the consulate in libya says "gee it's kinda dangerous here, we might be attacked"... and the state department says "no shit sherlock, it's fucking libya".

4 people died from a terrorist attack in 2012 (in a foreign country) and somehow it's a scandal, thousands die in new york during a terror attack in 2001 and it's a tragedy, even though the wtc had been targeted before, and the government knew it was a target.

Also, isn't "terrorism" kinda reserved for violence against a civilian population? Would a foreign government agency qualify as a civilian population? Just curious.

Edited August 17, 2013 by magley64

[marca]

So the consulate in libya says "gee it's kinda dangerous here, we might be attacked"... and the state department says "no shit sherlock, it's fucking libya".

4 people died from a terrorist attack in 2012 (in a foreign country) and somehow it's a scandal, thousands die in new york during a terror attack in 2001 and it's a tragedy, even though the wtc had been targeted before, and the government knew it was a target.

Also, isn't "terrorism" kinda reserved for violence against a civilian population? Would a foreign government agency qualify as a civilian population? Just curious.

First, there were significant concerns raised beforehand about the security in Benghazi.  It may have been due to bad luck, or maybe incompetence on the part of the various agencies that nothing was done.  While we don't like it, we are used to this type of performance by government officials.

 

Second, when the thing went down, nothing was done.  There were people begging for help and nobody who was in a position to do anything about it could get permission from Washington to move.  Our embassy and ambassador were under attack and Obama sat on his ass.  This was inexcusable.

 

Third, after the whole mess was over, nobody has been able to get a straight answer about how this was allowed to happen.  The administration is just doiing the roper doper waiting for people to forget about this.

 

I find the whole affair disgusting and unfortunately normal for this administration.  That anyone could defend this fries my brain.  There is no hope for the future if this kind of performance by our government officals is considered accepable.

[Al Z. Heimer]

This video was made 4 years ago. In my opinion it is all part of the big plan. Whatever that turns out to be. As soon as I read your post this vid popped back into my head. Example to whom? The powers that be I believe created the problem. They sure as hell aren't going to fix it.

[ReconRat]

I've been in both cities. Detroit has failed and I won't go back. Chicago is somewhat stable on a down-hill slope, but it's hanging in there. It's a city where you're very careful where you go. Parts of it are off limits for anyone. It seems apparent that recovery isn't much of an option. I still like Chicago, as a great place to visit. The real question is which city will be next.

 

Miami came close, but it did turn around pretty well. Oddly, Columbus, Cincinnati, Cleveland and Dayton are in worse shape than Miami. My guess might be Toledo and Cleveland, because of the proximity to Detroit. Much in the same way that Gary Indiana folded up near Chicago. NYC got cleaned up a bit before it was too late, so it's not impossible.

 

Los Angeles is actually a very small part of the metropolis. A little area downtown with no income. It's as bad as Detroit, but the rest of the metropolis props it up with cash. I guess DC is proped up also.

 

Yes, we've reached a point where large cities fail. No, the federal will not bail them out. I say it again, who's next?

 

Thanks Tonik, for sticking to the subject.

[Tigerpaw]

meh.  stop watching news, or watch it objectively and do your own research.  study history.  the sky is not falling, chicken little.

[ReconRat]

Or looking at it another way. Name a city that has gone "up hill". I can't think of any. But my memory goes back to the 50s and 60s, so there's not going to be much improvement seen much of anywhere.

 

Judge anyway there is, crime, foreclosures, median income, unemployment rate, modern transportation and infrastructure, whatever marks a good city. Arts is what looks like one exception. Even a failing city can have good arts and entertainment.

 

Sort of Nero fiddled while Rome burned.

[ReconRat]

Further fueling the fire, Chicago debt was downgraded this week. Basically each person in Chicago owes the city about 4700 bucks to break even. Yeah... not happening.

 

Just for fun, I crunched Detroit's debt vs population. Since everyone who can leave has left, the citizens of Detroit own the city 25,500 bucks each to break even.

 

Gosh, that makes Chicago look good.

 

edit: btw, cleveland residents owe the city 6100 bucks each to break even.

Toledo only has $97 per resident of city debt (2009). And still considered in trouble. Various problems.

If you haven't heard, the Chinese are buying property in Toledo, much like the British invested in Detroit.

Cincinnati clicking along at $2140 debt per resident.

Akron is at $3024 per resident.

Dayton is at $848 per resident.

Columbus is at $3010 per resident, but rated sound (Aaa) by Moody's.

 

Detroit isn't the first to go bankrupt. About 150 US cities have done so over time. And Cleveland was the most notable in 2008.

Edited August 17, 2013 by ReconRat

[ReconRat]

Why do these numbers go against everything my educated counter-parts have been touting for almost 7 years?

Living in the past? only a decade ago, the dot com boom pushed everyone into a surplus.

And unwisely, most decided to spend it. Foolishly, when it was gone as both surplus and income,

the spending continued at the elevated levels. Ergo, instant debt. The bonus income never came back.

 

And people aren't much different than cities, many went over into new heights of debt also.

Makes sense, people are cities, cities are people.

boom unemployment

boom foreclosures.

boom banks in trouble

boom governments seeking more cash flow from anywhere

boom people ain't got it

[magley64]

Living in the past? only a decade ago, the dot com boom pushed everyone into a surplus.

And unwisely, most decided to spend it. Foolishly, when it was gone as both surplus and income,

The dotcom boom was only a decade ago?

[ReconRat]

The dotcom boom was only a decade ago?

90's really. Then stable for a while. But the profits and surpluses ran on out for another decade and more.

The errors in city financing mostly occured a decade ago.

 

edit: btw, now read that San Francisco is in shakey territory also.

Edited August 18, 2013 by ReconRat