Take a 1960 statistic when Detroit had the highest per capita income of any major city in the country; add 50 years of liberal Democratic rule, and the result is a city in ruin that is now about 1/3rd the size of it's former self.

 

Pay attention America, we no longer need to point to Europe to see our country's future if we keep on our current path!!

 

 

NAILED IT .

Didn't I read recently that 40 percent of Kentuckians have trouble reading and writing? Why yes, I did.

 

Cities all across the country. not just Detroit, have lost population over the past several decades. White flight is what it's called.

 

Don't think they've lost 25% between 2000 and 2010 though. I believe Detroit's lost something like 60% since the 1950 census.

It doesn't matter if it was 50 years of conservative Republican rule if the leaders are corrupt.

 

Quit reading the labels.

 

Agree that corruption runs rampant in both parties, and that a large part of the problems with many large cities and other governmental entities in this country are due to this corruption, etc. This corruption & ineptitude has been allowed to continue unchecked for decades by an uninformed or uncaring electorate. While I'm not big on labels either; the facts are hard to ignore in this case (and many, many others in similar situations)??

 

Overpaying for unacceptable results in education are at the root of many of these problems. Schools producing illiterate "graduates" result in uninformed voters, that tend to perpetuate the madness by continuing to elect those who tell them what they want to hear, regardless of their party or their true intent (The continuation of their power base by essentially enslaving them as wards of the state).

 

PS: I'd be interested to hear an example of a city/country/etc., major or otherwise, that has been under 50 years of conservative rule; and is in financial trouble?? :confused:

Seriously when you take the highway to downtown and pass through the city its depressing. Even if you know the estimated number it doesn't prepare you for site you will see. Houses with holes in the roof, broken windows, graffiti, fire damage . Rows upon rows of these houses.

 

Pretty much what I saw, last time I was there. You get a block away GM World Headquarters and you are right in the middle of what you describe, only buildings instead of houses. I found it amazing and sad.

It doesn't matter if it was 50 years of conservative Republican rule if the leaders are corrupt.

 

Quit reading the labels.

 

 

Esp if you like democrats and dont trust R's . Just pretend it doesn't matter .

 

It doesn't matter who you like or trust. Scratch that. It shouldn't matter who you like or trust. Too broad of a brush is being painted with these statements of blame on liberal, union leadership. There are countless examples of liberal, union leadership that have been successful running the country, running states and running cities. To act like Detroit failed because their leaders were liberals and union leaders is false. They failed because they were a bunch of corrupt idiots who can't read. That's like me saying all Republicans are racist because of something one Republican said.

Agree that corruption runs rampant in both parties, and that a large part of the problems with many large cities and other governmental entities in this country are due to this corruption, etc. This corruption & ineptitude has been allowed to continue unchecked for decades by an uninformed or uncaring electorate. While I'm not big on labels either; the facts are hard to ignore in this case (and many, many others in similar situations)??

 

Overpaying for unacceptable results in education are at the root of many of these problems. Schools producing illiterate "graduates" result in uninformed voters, that tend to perpetuate the madness by continuing to elect those who tell them what they want to hear, regardless of their party or their true intent (The continuation of their power base by essentially enslaving them as wards of the state).

 

PS: I'd be interested to hear an example of a city/country/etc., major or otherwise, that has been under 50 years of conservative rule; and is in financial trouble?? :confused:

 

 

Are there not countless examples of both throughout our country? Aren't there plenty of cities and states that lean one label or the other that flourish because their leaders are actually doing what they were elected to do?

I'd like to see just a couple of examples of a conservative ran city that went belly up the past 50 years . I mean a real city with 100k plus people. They may be out there . Lets see a few . I can say Detroit and Ca have a lot in common as far as leadership and political leanings , how are they doing ?

Take a 1960 statistic when Detroit had the highest per capita income of any major city in the country; add 50 years of liberal Democratic rule, and the result is a city in ruin that is now about 1/3rd the size of it's former self.

 

Pay attention America, we no longer need to point to Europe to see our country's future if we keep on our current path!!

Sounds to me that Detroit was simply too auto-centric to survive a change in the economic model. No different, really, than towns in Nevada that died when the gold ran out. The key is having a diversified economic base. Unions and Dem administrations sound like side issues to me, not root causes of the urban decay.

This is all about Liberal policies, it has nothing to do with inovations in car manufacturing, automation, car buying trends, foreign competition, etc., etc.. :facepalm:

Sounds to me that Detroit was simply too auto-centric to survive a change in the economic model. No different, really, than towns in Nevada that died when the gold ran out. The key is having a diversified economic base. Unions and Dem administrations sound like side issues to me, not root causes of the urban decay.

 

Sounds to me like you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Gold was a finite resource. The manufacture of cars is not. Cars are still being manufactured elsewhere in the United States (TN, AL, OH, TX, and even KY). Wonder why these plants didn’t choose to locate in automobile the automobile Mecca of Detroit or even in the state of MI? Was anyone in MI responsible for the climate not being as desirable as elsewhere in the US? That is just the revenue side. On the expense side those same individuals structured and maintained the defined benefits plan that ultimately bankrupted the city. I think Republicans are boneheads and have plenty of their own gaffs; however, to pharaphrase Marty, this one belongs to the political party and the unions that have ran the motor city forever.

This is all about Liberal policies, it has nothing to do with inovations in car manufacturing, automation, car buying trends, foreign competition, etc., etc.. :facepalm:

 

You are aware of the definition of bankruptcy and how it happens correct?

 

The industry changed due to the factors you mentioned and city revenues went down.

 

What party was in charge when this changed occurred and how did they adjust the expense side of the equation, particularly the defined benefits plan?

I rarely enter this forum, but the Detroit bankruptcy and the national pension crisis is of particular interest to me. I will probably regret entering it this time.

It sounds like middle and upper income people are leaving Detroit for just outside the city line. Is Detroit's tax structure a very steep progressive tax structure, ie the more you make, the higher your tax rate? If so, I can see how that would cause middle and upper income people to leave and with them, the tax base. Losing middle and upper income people hurts. In most cases they pay more to the city in taxes than the take out in the form of services so that "income" can be used to pay for overhead and the "negative income" from lower income people who generally use more services than they pay in.

Sounds to me like you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Gold was a finite resource. The manufacture of cars is not. Cars are still being manufactured elsewhere in the United States (TN, AL, OH, TX, and even KY). Wonder why these plants didn’t choose to locate in automobile the automobile Mecca of Detroit or even in the state of MI? Was anyone in MI responsible for the climate not being as desirable as elsewhere in the US? That is just the revenue side. On the expense side those same individuals structured and maintained the defined benefits plan that ultimately bankrupted the city. I think Republicans are boneheads and have plenty of their own gaffs; however, to pharaphrase Marty, this one belongs to the political party and the unions that have ran the motor city forever.

Ghost towns pop up when economic models go kaput. Doesn't matter whether we're talking about a finite resource or the manufacture of cars. There's an expiration date on everything.

 

If you're right that "this one belongs to the political party and the unions," then why is Chicago still a thriving city and Detroit isn't?

 

The obvious, easy answer for most respondents to this board is to blame unions and Democrats. It's far more complicated than that, and in Detroit's case, it starts with non-diversification of its economic base.

It sounds like middle and upper income people are leaving Detroit for just outside the city line. Is Detroit's tax structure a very steep progressive tax structure, ie the more you make, the higher your tax rate? If so, I can see how that would cause middle and upper income people to leave and with them, the tax base. Losing middle and upper income people hurts. In most cases they pay more to the city in taxes than the take out in the form of services so that "income" can be used to pay for overhead and the "negative income" from lower income people who generally use more services than they pay in.

 

 

I can see how that would drive people out. Why pay a higher tax rate if you don't have to and can move elsewhere?