Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Connecticut
34,636 posts, read 56,391,795 times
Reputation: 11150

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hartford_renter View Post
Dear Connecticut...

Please file for bankruptcy now! You have no other option. You were warned, its happening.

Thanks
HartfordRenter
"The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!" Jay

 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:17 AM
 
Location: Connecticut
34,636 posts, read 56,391,795 times
Reputation: 11150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff22152 View Post
As a native of Connecticut, I'll say the future of the state's economic viability rests on the ability of its cities and towns to cooperate regionally and even consolidate.

The New England "town" is obsolete in the present-day and incompatible with a global economy. If Connecticut is truly going to compete against other states and regions for a slice of the economic pie, it must shed its current form of local government: 169 tiny fiefdoms that rarely look beyond their own borders. In a nutshell, this inward and local provincialism is a principal reason why the state's economy has stagnated for decades, why the state cannot lure an adequate number of new high-paying jobs or industries, why its cities are a national embarrassment, and why it's a Herculean task to initiate any public reforms or investments to jump start the economy. What's worse, this provincialism, which has been fueled by 350 years of tradition, has spawned some of the most glaring racial and socioeconomic disparities in the country.

I know that the ideas of robust regional cooperation or municipal consolidation are controversial. With that said, how else can the state help save itself from fiscal ruin and economic irrelevance? The current model simply no longer works.
Yes, because even Massachusetts, which is similarly set up, is having such a bad time with it. Jay
 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:21 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff22152 View Post
As a native of Connecticut, I'll say the future of the state's economic viability rests on the ability of its cities and towns to cooperate regionally and even consolidate.

The New England "town" is obsolete in the present-day and incompatible with a global economy. If Connecticut is truly going to compete against other states and regions for a slice of the economic pie, it must shed its current form of local government: 169 tiny fiefdoms that rarely look beyond their own borders. In a nutshell, this inward and local provincialism is a principal reason why the state's economy has stagnated for decades, why the state cannot lure an adequate number of new high-paying jobs or industries, why its cities are a national embarrassment, and why it's a Herculean task to initiate any public reforms or investments to jump start the economy. What's worse, this provincialism, which has been fueled by 350 years of tradition, has spawned some of the most glaring racial and socioeconomic disparities in the country.

I know that the ideas of robust regional cooperation or municipal consolidation are controversial. With that said, how else can the state help save itself from fiscal ruin and economic irrelevance? The current model simply no longer works.
Wha? So you think a more centralized, more powerful Govt will be better for the economy? Which economy -- Capitalism or Socialism?
 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayCT View Post
"The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!" Jay
If Hartford-renter was selling shoes, I would join the chorus. But since he is an actuary, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.
 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:31 AM
 
24,509 posts, read 17,974,587 times
Reputation: 40204
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayCT View Post
Yes, because even Massachusetts, which is similarly set up, is having such a bad time with it. Jay
Massachusetts has Proposition 2 1/2 that limits what towns can spend without the town voting for an override. Connecticut has nothing like that. Ballot initiatives that amend the state constitution are the only way to put any kind of financial controls on local property taxes. Unpaid elected town officials aren't particularly good at standing up to teacher unions, cop unions, and the other town employees looking for all those generous benefits and big salary hikes. With Prop 2 1/2, it's either accept the contract or there will be layoffs. No way the town is going to vote for an override to fund town employees who get a better deal than the rest of the taxpayers.

In the 1970's before Prop 2 1/2, lots of Massachusetts towns were indeed having a bad time with it. 2% pension vesting, pension spiking, pay higher than comparable private sector jobs, incredibly out of line vacation and sick time, "disability" retirement where trivial things guaranteed a paycheck for life. That all got trimmed back decades ago.
 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Connecticut
34,636 posts, read 56,391,795 times
Reputation: 11150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
If Hartford-renter was selling shoes, I would join the chorus. But since he is an actuary, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.
Yes, because everything people post about themselves is true. Jay
 
Old 06-27-2017, 09:42 AM
 
24,509 posts, read 17,974,587 times
Reputation: 40204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
If Hartford-renter was selling shoes, I would join the chorus. But since he is an actuary, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.
So an actuary is an expert on Federal law for states filing bankruptcy? Last I knew, states can't go bankrupt. The best they can do is foist off all the liabilities on cities & towns and let the cities & towns go bankrupt. I'm thinking of the crazed public school teacher pension problem, in particular. Detroit non-uniformed retirees took a 5% pay cut, lost COLA protection, and had their health care trimmed as part of their bankruptcy settlement.
 
Old 06-27-2017, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
So an actuary is an expert on Federal law for states filing bankruptcy? Last I knew, states can't go bankrupt. The best they can do is foist off all the liabilities on cities & towns and let the cities & towns go bankrupt. I'm thinking of the crazed public school teacher pension problem, in particular. Detroit non-uniformed retirees took a 5% pay cut, lost COLA protection, and had their health care trimmed as part of their bankruptcy settlement.
The legal landscape can change on States' bankruptcies. Before this issue was settled, it was actually unsettled. Our SCOTUS has also a track record of changing its mind on what is "Constitutional." If pressure builds on Congress, things may change.

So I would not be too shocked if States' bankruptcies become legal again. At least, we are talking about Chapter 9, which is in fact a "re-modeling" avenue.

But this process has to work its way through. Process-wise, CT is not there yet.
 
Old 06-27-2017, 11:16 AM
 
1,979 posts, read 1,434,646 times
Reputation: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
If Hartford-renter was selling shoes, I would join the chorus. But since he is an actuary, I would give him the benefit of the doubt.
I think the states in a bad place but they could still fix it it will just be awful for the next 3-5 years.
 
Old 06-27-2017, 11:42 AM
 
1,979 posts, read 1,434,646 times
Reputation: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
No it's not. Suburban areas are really an extension of the urban areas. We're talking about urban / suburban vs. rural.

You were saying that although Southern Cities gleam, rural areas have poverty. "See? So the South sucks!!" That was basically your argument.

However, the same exist everywhere you have rural areas. Not only the South. Take NY State for example. Rural upstate areas are dirt poor too.




Who's "we?" And is "whoever-we" competent enough to re-****** and re-engineer society, which is extremely complex and dynamic?

Socialists, who are the ones who want to social-engineer societies have a horrible track record... Do you have anything new to propose, or the same-old same-old Socialist / Marxist ideas, which are tyrannical in their true nature...




Not familiar with Boston, but very familiar with NYC. I moved from Hartford to NYC in the 90s.

In the early 90s NYC reformed welfare, obliterated gangs, war on small crimes, war on big crimes, which made the city a lot safer. Able-bodied adults were driven out of the street corners and into the jobs.

NYC's economic growth (which still continues to this day) is founded on a cleaner and safer city, which now sustains professionals (young and old) to move in and live here. Hartford is a ghost town after 5 pm. You don't even dare to walk anywhere downtown, let alone North Hartford.

Hartford took the opposite course, let welfare bums hang out on streets all day long, collect welfare, soft on crime, more social programs, while tightening the noose on businesses' throats, higher taxes.

So it was a policy difference, not because somebody put money into NYC and not Hartford. Hartford has had a lot money put into it, but its politicians have squandered it. It chased busineses away, now it is in the brink of bankruptcy. NYC's coffers are full now, and it can afford things that Hartford can only dream of.

If anything, Hartford should have been twice as tough than NYC on welfare and crime, and twice as friendly than NYC on businesses.
Ct got tough on crime in the late 90's as well. Hartford is much safer then in 1991. Cleaning up cities and enforcing laws costs a lot of money thou. NYC had to spend a fortune to clean up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top