• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge rules Detroit bankruptcy filing UNCONSTITUTIONAL[W:584]

haymarket said:
Earlier in this thread I provided a great amount of verifiable evidence showing that while the TAX RATE in Detroit is high the actual tax paid is rather low because the homes are valued at such low levels compared to the suburbs around it. Because of that reality, Detroiters who do move to the suburbs as you suggest - voting with their feet - are almost always voting themselves a TAX INCREASE in doing so. One can get a three bedroom home in Detroit for under $10,000.00. There are some available for as little as $2,500.00 and that is an intact home. Just cross the line into Dearborn or Southfield and you will expect to many many times that for the same size home. Because you are now paying five to ten times as much for the home, even if your tax rate is half of that in the city, you still end up paying a great deal more in taxes due to the home value differences.

You are right that people did vote with their feet by leaving Detroit. However, it had precious little to do with liberalism or taxation since they normally moved to Wayne County suburbs where the people in charge were also Democrats and the taxes ended up even more than they were paying.
Click to expand...

It seems that people are willing to pay more in taxes, as well as uproot their families, if it means they can remove themselves from incompetent and corrupt liberal mismanagement. That would probably hold ture for any educated person, unless they are part of the corruption.
 
Grant said:
It seems that people are willing to pay more in taxes, as well as uproot their families, if it means they can remove themselves from incompetent and corrupt liberal mismanagement. That would probably hold ture for any educated person, unless they are part of the corruption.
Click to expand...

Yeah - that is why they move to other communities with Democratic leadership and representation also. :doh:roll::shock:
 
haymarket said:
Yeah - that is why they move to other communities with Democratic leadership and representation also. :doh:roll::shock:
Click to expand...

But many are moving to 'right to work' states which are more free from the Union/Democratic mutual corruption association. I feel this mess will continue until there are greater State rights where they will be competing with each other to attract the best people. Right now, in many areas, there is little incentive to work hard, develop a trade, and improve your life and that of your family. The food stamp environment has made sure of that.
 
Grant said:
But many are moving to 'right to work' states which are more free from the Union/Democratic mutual corruption association. I feel this mess will continue until there are greater State rights where they will be competing with each other to attract the best people. Right now, in many areas, there is little incentive to work hard, develop a trade, and improve your life and that of your family. The food stamp environment has made sure of that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a few are. There are most always a few people who do most things - even if they are the exceptions to the rule.

But look at this statistic about Michigan - and that is what we are talking about. In 1950, there were 4.5 million people living in southeastern Michigan with 1.8 million of them living in Detroit. Today there are 720,000 people living in Detroit.... while the same number as 60 years ago - 4.5 million live in southeastern Michigan.

The migration has simply been from the city to the suburbs.
 
Breaking News: Death By Falling is expected to hit all time lows in Detroit as the same judge has declared gravity to be unconstitutional.
 
haymarket said:
Perhaps a few are. There are most always a few people who do most things - even if they are the exceptions to the rule.

But look at this statistic about Michigan - and that is what we are talking about. In 1950, there were 4.5 million people living in southeastern Michigan with 1.8 million of them living in Detroit. Today there are 720,000 people living in Detroit.... while the same number as 60 years ago - 4.5 million live in southeastern Michigan.

The migration has simply been from the city to the suburbs.
Click to expand...

People left, that's for sure. What it does indicate is that the State of Michigan is not attracting people while other States have been growing. Perhaps there are reasons that should be honestly looked at
 
haymarket said:
Why would you say something like that?
Click to expand...
Could have something to do with you trying to place blame on a couple of Republican Mayors who left office more than fifty years ago.
haymarket said:
Detroit began its slide under two consecutive Republican mayors from 1950 through 1961. During that time, under Cobo and Mariani, Detroit lost 10% of its population. That was the beginning of the end of a trend that is still in effect today.
Click to expand...

Tough to live that one down...
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Could have something to do with you trying to place blame on a couple of Republican Mayors who left office more than fifty years ago.


Tough to live that one down...
Click to expand...

Why are you lying?

Why are you attempting to take a part of my post and take it out of its complete context?

Why would you intentionally misrepresent my complete argument which had the total opposite end as its major point?

My point was clear: those on the right who attempt to use the Detroit situation as a sledge hammer to beat Democrats or the progressives and blame them as the cause of the Detroit bankruptcy and engaging in intellectual fraud. it ignores many things including what I repeatedly stated were the main reasons for the situation
1- the economic abandonment of the city as evident by a 2/3 population exodus and loss of businness. jobs and the tax base which went with it, and
2- the tremendous racial gap and divide and the problems caused by that.

You know this well because you took issue with it and called it a GROSS MISREPRESEANTATION. So we know you are well aware of it.

YOu also know well that my listing of the two republican mayors was to paint the COMPLETE PICTURE of Detroit s slide which began in 1951 seeing the city lose 10% of its population in that decade.

To twist, distort, cherry pick and otherwise pervert my comment out of that context is to engage in the worst sort of intellectual fraud.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Why are you lying?

Why are you attempting to take a part of my post and take it out of its complete context?

Why would you intentionally misrepresent my complete argument which had the total opposite end as its major point?

My point was clear: those on the right who attempt to use the Detroit situation as a sledge hammer to beat Democrats or the progressives and blame them as the cause of the Detroit bankruptcy and engaging in intellectual fraud. it ignores many things including what I repeatedly stated were the main reasons for the situation
1- the economic abandonment of the city as evident by a 2/3 population exodus and loss of businness. jobs and the tax base which went with it, and
2- the tremendous racial gap and divide and the problems caused by that.

You know this well because you took issue with it and called it a GROSS MISREPRESEANTATION. So we know you are well aware of it.

YOu also know well that my listing of the two republican mayors was to paint the COMPLETE PICTURE of Detroit s slide which began in 1951 seeing the city lose 10% of its population in that decade.

To twist, distort, cherry pick and otherwise pervert my comment out of that context is to engage in the worst sort of intellectual fraud.
Click to expand...
I think you're taking this all wrong. You asked why another forum member would insinuate that you don't live in the real world. You asked why he would say that. I was genuinely concerned so I took it upon myself to offer a possible reason as to why someone would make such a claim.

I mean... OBVIOUSLY it would be completely retarded to suggest that a Mayor back in 1955 has even a modicum of culpability for what has become of Detroit and we all should KNOW that you weren't suggesting this. All I was trying to do was to point out that someone COULD infer that you were trying to claim that events that occurred way back when, over half a century ago, by people that are long dead, are somehow relevant to the current situation. You see, for some people that COULD be interpreted as a shameless attempt to make it seem as if Republicans somehow bear a portion of the responsibility because a couple of them presided over the city... starting just prior to the start of the Korean war and ending just prior to the start of Vietnam war.

Look, I know full well that you are above these sorts of shenanigans but others may not know that. I was merely trying to shed some light on a troubling situation... because I care.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I think you're taking this all wrong. You asked why another forum member would insinuate that you don't live in the real world. You asked why he would say that. I was genuinely concerned so I took it upon myself to offer a possible reason as to why someone would make such a claim..
Click to expand...

Yeah right. :dohAnd The Japanese were just trying to help update the American fleet at Pearl Harbor in 41. :doh
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I think you're taking this all wrong. You asked why another forum member would insinuate that you don't live in the real world. You asked why he would say that. I was genuinely concerned so I took it upon myself to offer a possible reason as to why someone would make such a claim.

I mean... OBVIOUSLY it would be completely retarded to suggest that a Mayor back in 1955 has even a modicum of culpability for what has become of Detroit and we all should KNOW that you weren't suggesting this. All I was trying to do was to point out that someone COULD infer that you were trying to claim that events that occurred way back when, over half a century ago, by people that are long dead, are somehow relevant to the current situation. You see, for some people that COULD be interpreted as a shameless attempt to make it seem as if Republicans somehow bear a portion of the responsibility because a couple of them presided over the city... starting just prior to the start of the Korean war and ending just prior to the start of Vietnam war.

Look, I know full well that you are above these sorts of shenanigans but others may not know that. I was merely trying to shed some light on a troubling situation... because I care.
Click to expand...

The fact of the matter is Coleman Young allowed Detroit's government to become corrupted during his 30+ years in office. The city council started funneling money to the point where it seemed to magically disappear. The police department became corrupt. The school board became corrupt. It isn't a coincidence that all this happened while he was in office. Yes, it became worse after he was out, but it all started with him. He only managed to stay in office that long because he had cronies that would target most of the poor people by telling them their houses would be torn down if they didn't vote for him.
 
Grant said:
But many are moving to 'right to work' states which are more free from the Union/Democratic mutual corruption association. I feel this mess will continue until there are greater State rights where they will be competing with each other to attract the best people. Right now, in many areas, there is little incentive to work hard, develop a trade, and improve your life and that of your family. The food stamp environment has made sure of that.
Click to expand...

yea
like those are the people who are otherwise going to work hard and succeed
damn foodstamps
not being hungry is a deterrent to success you insist
notice how stupid that sounds
 
haymarket said:
Why are you lying? Why are you attempting to take a part of my post and take it out of its complete context?
Click to expand...

The context really doesn't matter. The entire post is riddled with denial.
Why would you intentionally misrepresent my complete argument which had the total opposite end as its major point?
Click to expand...

Jack Fabulous did no such thing.
My point was clear: those on the right who attempt to use the Detroit situation as a sledge hammer to beat Democrats or the progressives and blame them as the cause of the Detroit bankruptcy and engaging in intellectual fraud.
Click to expand...

They deserve to be beaten with sledgehammers and those who voted for them deserve to be ridiculed forever.

it ignores many things including what I repeatedly stated were the main reasons for the situation
1- the economic abandonment of the city as evident by a 2/3 population exodus and loss of businness. jobs and the tax base which went with it, and
Click to expand...

Why did they leave? High taxes? Corruption? They could see the writing on the crumbling walls?
2- the tremendous racial gap and divide and the problems caused by that.
Click to expand...
And who was responsible for that? Are you blaming Blacks here? Whites? What is the point of this assertion?

They should let Detroit die peacefully and then use it as a monument for all the leftism stands for, as a reminder to future generations of what happens when governments, unions, and crony capitalists collude to fill their pockets at the expense of the people.
 
Grant said:
The context really doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

And after admitting that - it shows that even you have owned up to your admiration of and support for intellectual fraud. In all my years I have never seen anybody say that context is not important.

But congratulations on admitting what you are really doing here. At least now its out in the open for all to see.
 
Green Balls said:
The fact of the matter is Coleman Young allowed Detroit's government to become corrupted during his 30+ years in office. The city council started funneling money to the point where it seemed to magically disappear. The police department became corrupt. The school board became corrupt. It isn't a coincidence that all this happened while he was in office. Yes, it became worse after he was out, but it all started with him. He only managed to stay in office that long because he had cronies that would target most of the poor people by telling them their houses would be torn down if they didn't vote for him.
Click to expand...

Coleman Young was a terrible mayor for one main reason: he pursued his goal of a black city above all else. In doing this - telling people to hit the road at Eight Mile - he drove out most of the remaining whites and that was then followed by middle class blacks who did not want to live in a poor city environment. That was his crime and that was his great sin.

Young did not have to threaten anybody. He was an immensely popular figure in the black community and they were more than willing to overlook any failings he had.

He had people on his staff go to prison. But he himself was never charged or tried for anything.

btw - you want to leave the school board out of it in liking him to the mayor as the two are legally separate and have nothing to do with each other. The sad reality is that the school boards in the Young years did a better job managing finances and schools that the state has done over the last 15 years basically under the district. At least then they balanced budgets in some years and attracted students filling nearly 300 schools. Today under state control - as its been for over a decade - its the opposite with deficits and closing buildings and a shrinking district.
 
For those who want to place blame on others - look at the year 1969 and the mayoral race for your answers.

That was the last major election in Detroit where white voters still represented the majority who turned out on election day. The terrible 67 riots were close in the rear view mirror and white families were leaving in droves. Two very fine men ended up in the general election - Roman Gribbs and Richard H. Austin. Basically almost all the whites voted for Gribbs because he was white while blacks did the same for Austin. Gribbs won and ended up without much public support as his voters continued to leave and proved ineffective.

Austin was a CPA and a whiz with numbers. He was professional through and through and had the complete opposite personality of the combative and abrasive Coleman Young. He was a gentleman and a unifier who did not pander to racial agendas knowing they were divisive.

While Austin lost, he then ran for Michigan Secretary of State - a position he won and held for the next 24 years doing an excellent job reforming a terrible state department which had been neglected for decades. You will find few in Michigan who do not praise Richard Austin for his excellent work.

The sad reality is that had more whites voted for Austin that year, the history of Detroit may be very very different. He would have brought his professional expertise to the mayors office and the rcial divisiveness of the Young administration may never have happened with a long Austin tenure in city hall. It truly could have been a historic WHAT IF moment for the city.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom