Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

  1. #1
    Guru
    Celebrity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    VT, USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,982

    The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    In an ongoing crisis involving tainted water, Flint, MI has been effectively silenced as a political entity. The city must now get approval from the state in order to sue the state.

    I don't think the state will allow Flint to sue, but do they really have to? At this point, shouldn't the humanitarian crisis aspect take over?

    Even if the state does fix the problem, will Flint be able to sue if they do a poor job? This is not clear in the article, however it does mention that a statute of limitations on the notice of intent to sue might not hold up in court.

    "Whether the ... resolution stripping the city’s authority would survive a direct legal challenge is a question for another day. In the meantime, the city continues to be significantly under state control, even after the departure of the emergency manager, and while accumulating significant obligations as a result of decisions made by, and/or at the direction of emergency managers."

    She said Flint has made "a request to the state for assistance with these obligations."

    After court threat, state of Michigan removed Flint's power to sue
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Then, you can't complain about this.
    That's the thing about living in a free country, you don't get to pick and choose the rights you want protected. Either they're all protected, or none of them are.

  2. #2
    Guru
    FieldTheorist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,840

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrity View Post
    In an ongoing crisis involving tainted water, Flint, MI has been effectively silenced as a political entity. The city must now get approval from the state in order to sue the state.

    I don't think the state will allow Flint to sue, but do they really have to? At this point, shouldn't the humanitarian crisis aspect take over?

    Even if the state does fix the problem, will Flint be able to sue if they do a poor job? This is not clear in the article, however it does mention that a statute of limitations on the notice of intent to sue might not hold up in court.




    After court threat, state of Michigan removed Flint's power to sue
    Welcome to America. Oh you're poor? Your rights are theoretical. If you'd just be rich for a moment, your rights could become actual.
    "The question is whether privileged elites should dominate mass-communication and should use this power, as they tell us they must [to] manipulate and deceive the 'stupid majority', and remove them from the public arena. The question, in brief, is whether Democracy and Freedom are values to be preserved or threats to be avoided." --Chomsky

  3. #3
    Guru
    Celebrity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    VT, USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,982

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by FieldTheorist View Post
    Welcome to America. Oh you're poor? Your rights are theoretical. If you'd just be rich for a moment, your rights could become actual.
    True, but this is not just "poor," and "rich," this is political. Michigan is a political space.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Then, you can't complain about this.
    That's the thing about living in a free country, you don't get to pick and choose the rights you want protected. Either they're all protected, or none of them are.

  4. #4
    Guru
    FieldTheorist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,840

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrity View Post
    True, but this is not just "poor," and "rich," this is political. Michigan is a political space.
    Politics is 100% about poor and rich, depending upon how broadly you interpret those words. That being said, I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make by calling Michigan a "political space." Could you clarify what you mean?
    "The question is whether privileged elites should dominate mass-communication and should use this power, as they tell us they must [to] manipulate and deceive the 'stupid majority', and remove them from the public arena. The question, in brief, is whether Democracy and Freedom are values to be preserved or threats to be avoided." --Chomsky

  5. #5
    Guru
    Celebrity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    VT, USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,982

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by FieldTheorist View Post
    Politics is 100% about poor and rich, depending upon how broadly you interpret those words. That being said, I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make by calling Michigan a "political space." Could you clarify what you mean?
    I don't think that Flint is 100% poor people, at any given time, as part of Michigan. Flint might be poorer than other cities. We should measure how poor two cities are based on economic data. We can measure how poor a city is per capita, by income, relative to some benchmark.

    If there's a middle class in Flint, and I think there is, then they are not "rich." Then we could divide the city into groups of "rich" and "not rich."

    So if Flint is 100% poor people, then your simple statement might be right, but if Flint has fewer rights because they are significantly more poor, then shouldn't the upper class have more rights than the middle class have more rights than the lower class? I'm sure that high culture involves buying rights. Maybe it's just a dirty little secret rich people have to take care of once in a while, while they could be out yachting instead. So, there's a difference between who has many rights and who does not, and who has rights and who does not.

    Do rich people simply have all the rights that poor people don't have, or does any citizen have rights according to what economic class they are in? I prefer the latter, because I don't like the social mobility structure of the former. It would be nice to not have to choose between the two, but it is the reality that we live in.

    Remember that article, Congress Doesn't Care What You Think?

    Well, for the average citizen that means awarding no citizen special privilege. Upon review of the study, I found that this is not as fair as it seems at first blush.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Then, you can't complain about this.
    That's the thing about living in a free country, you don't get to pick and choose the rights you want protected. Either they're all protected, or none of them are.

  6. #6
    Guru
    FieldTheorist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,840

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrity View Post
    I don't think that Flint is 100% poor people, at any given time, as part of Michigan. Flint might be poorer than other cities. We should measure how poor two cities are based on economic data. We can measure how poor a city is per capita, by income, relative to some benchmark.

    If there's a middle class in Flint, and I think there is, then they are not "rich." Then we could divide the city into groups of "rich" and "not rich."

    So if Flint is 100% poor people, then your simple statement might be right, but if Flint has fewer rights because they are significantly more poor, then shouldn't the upper class have more rights than the middle class have more rights than the lower class? I'm sure that high culture involves buying rights. Maybe it's just a dirty little secret rich people have to take care of once in a while, while they could be out yachting instead. So, there's a difference between who has many rights and who does not, and who has rights and who does not.

    Do rich people simply have all the rights that poor people don't have, or does any citizen have rights according to what economic class they are in? I prefer the latter, because I don't like the social mobility structure of the former. It would be nice to not have to choose between the two, but it is the reality that we live in.

    Remember that article, Congress Doesn't Care What You Think?

    Well, for the average citizen that means awarding no citizen special privilege. Upon review of the study, I found that this is not as fair as it seems at first blush.
    1.) Of course the rich have more "rights" (and by that I, of course, mean privileges). Do you think wealthy or even solidly middle-class neighborhoods have to worry about having lead contaminated pipes? I mean, let's take your own article that you present, we know for a fact that the rich have far, far more access to the government's ear. That's a privilege the poor doesn't have.

    2.) I'm talking about really-existing America, not the America that we would one day like to have.
    "The question is whether privileged elites should dominate mass-communication and should use this power, as they tell us they must [to] manipulate and deceive the 'stupid majority', and remove them from the public arena. The question, in brief, is whether Democracy and Freedom are values to be preserved or threats to be avoided." --Chomsky

  7. #7
    Guru
    Celebrity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    VT, USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,982

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by FieldTheorist View Post
    1.) Of course the rich have more "rights" (and by that I, of course, mean privileges). Do you think wealthy or even solidly middle-class neighborhoods have to worry about having lead contaminated pipes? I mean, let's take your own article that you present, we know for a fact that the rich have far, far more access to the government's ear. That's a privilege the poor doesn't have.

    2.) I'm talking about really-existing America, not the America that we would one day like to have.
    I have to agree with that analysis, and yet, I would still like to believe that the poor have some rights. Like due process, for example.

    Even poor people are very patriotic. It's very sad when our country lets them down again, and again.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Then, you can't complain about this.
    That's the thing about living in a free country, you don't get to pick and choose the rights you want protected. Either they're all protected, or none of them are.

  8. #8
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,056

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrity View Post
    True, but this is not just "poor," and "rich," this is political. Michigan is a political space.
    And since the voters in Michigan who reside in Flint did NOT support the Republican Governor, the Republican candidates for State House or State Senate - they end up on the short end of the stick.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #9
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:36 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    521

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    And since the voters in Michigan who reside in Flint did NOT support the Republican Governor, the Republican candidates for State House or State Senate - they end up on the short end of the stick.
    They ended up on the end of the stick they voted for since Flint's leadership had turned the city into a colossal cesspool of failure long before Snyder came along

  10. #10
    Sage

    Hawkeye10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Olympia Wa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,580

    Re: The State of Michigan has silenced Flint

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrity View Post
    I don't think that Flint is 100% poor people, at any given time, as part of Michigan. Flint might be poorer than other cities. We should measure how poor two cities are based on economic data. We can measure how poor a city is per capita, by income, relative to some benchmark.

    If there's a middle class in Flint, and I think there is, then they are not "rich." Then we could divide the city into groups of "rich" and "not rich."

    So if Flint is 100% poor people, then your simple statement might be right, but if Flint has fewer rights because they are significantly more poor, then shouldn't the upper class have more rights than the middle class have more rights than the lower class? I'm sure that high culture involves buying rights. Maybe it's just a dirty little secret rich people have to take care of once in a while, while they could be out yachting instead. So, there's a difference between who has many rights and who does not, and who has rights and who does not.

    Do rich people simply have all the rights that poor people don't have, or does any citizen have rights according to what economic class they are in? I prefer the latter, because I don't like the social mobility structure of the former. It would be nice to not have to choose between the two, but it is the reality that we live in.

    Remember that article, Congress Doesn't Care What You Think?

    Well, for the average citizen that means awarding no citizen special privilege. Upon review of the study, I found that this is not as fair as it seems at first blush.
    Per Capita Income for Flint Michigan 2014

    US $28,889
    Michigan $26,613
    Flint $23,253
    Flint Michigan Household Income | Department of Numbers

    Not great at all, Flint.
    At some point, this practice of denunciation being insuperable and due process just an irritant and a useless antiquity, like an appendix — as it has been in the Weinstein and Moore cases — will have to stop, if the U.S. wishes to retain any credibility as a society of laws<<<<<<Conrad Black

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •