Should Detroit have an Emergency Financial Manager? (Coleman: bankruptcy, luxury)

[Retroit]

I say yes. Detroit has dragged down the metro area and Michigan long enough. Detroiters have complained that the state is not doing enough to help the city, and now they are upset that the state will come in to help fix the city. Detroiters should be embracing outside help with open arms, but they are too damn proud of the wonderful city they've created.

[Indentured Servant]

Yes…..if one does not believe in democracy. Detroit has not dragged down the area. The area abandoned Detroit leaving it without a tax base. Where is the emergency manager going to get the money? The only thing that an emergency manager would do is implement austerity measures like exist in Europe and the end result is that it will reduce the quality of life even more in the city, causing more people who can afford to leave….to leave, leaving nothing but poor people, who pay no taxes, thus increasing deficits and problems.

What Detroit needs is it's only central bank and currency so that it can print money like the national economy does when it gets in a bind. Nationally our country is in worse fiscal shape than the city of Detroit and it got that way under both parties. However, the ability to print money infinitely and to run deficits and debt infinitely is something that the city of Detroit does not have the luxury of. I think local governments should have all the tools that the national government has at its disposal.

[zthatzmanz28]

Just like the school board / superintendent it won't matter. The city wil continue to spiral no matter who is overseeing the destruction.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

Yes…..if one does not believe in democracy. Detroit has not dragged down the area. The area abandoned Detroit leaving it without a tax base. Where is the emergency manager going to get the money?

From those that abandoned the city (and their descendants). Although I never abandoned the city, I wouldn't mind my tax dollars being used to clean up the city. But I would feel much more comfortable if it was done by the state and not by the city.

The only thing that an emergency manager would do is implement austerity measures like exist in Europe and the end result is that it will reduce the quality of life even more in the city, causing more people who can afford to leave….to leave, leaving nothing but poor people, who pay no taxes, thus increasing deficits and problems.

It might reduce the quality of life of the typical unionized city worker, but that translates into better quality of life for the citizens. Detroit needs austerity measures. It has some of the highest paid city workers, not to mention a severely top-heavy bureaucracy with a bunch of highly-paid pencil-pushers.

What Detroit needs is it's only central bank and currency so that it can print money like the national economy does when it gets in a bind. Nationally our country is in worse fiscal shape than the city of Detroit and it got that way under both parties. However, the ability to print money infinitely and to run deficits and debt infinitely is something that the city of Detroit does not have the luxury of. I think local governments should have all the tools that the national government has at its disposal.

And who would accept that currency? Do you really think that a Detroiter could walk into a suburban store and pay for their merchandise with a Detroit Reserve Note with a portrait of Coleman A. Young on it? (Although I do agree that the debt run-up by our Federal Government and the printing of fiat money is egregious.)

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by Retroit

From those that abandoned the city (and their descendants). Although I never abandoned the city, I wouldn't mind my tax dollars being used to clean up the city. But I would feel much more comfortable if it was done by the state and not by the city.

Why? There are humans running the state and humans running the city of Detroit. Whats the difference?

It might reduce the quality of life of the typical unionized city worker, but that translates into better quality of life for the citizens. Detroit needs austerity measures. It has some of the highest paid city workers, not to mention a severely top-heavy bureaucracy with a bunch of highly-paid pencil-pushers.

While all those things might be true, Detroit lacks what most big cities lack and that is a sizable middle class tax base, sprinkled with a respectable wealthy class. When you have a city where such a large number of its citizens are poor, where so many businesses have divested from the city, where so many have abandoned the city.....the city cannot maintain the quality of life that it did when it was wealthier. A city of poor people can only afford a government with poor revenues....which means a reduced quality of services, regardless of what union workers make. All major cities have unions and such.

And who would accept that currency? Do you really think that a Detroiter could walk into a suburban store and pay for their merchandise with a Detroit Reserve Note with a portrait of Coleman A. Young on it? (Although I do agree that the debt run-up by our Federal Government and the printing of fiat money is egregious.)

I was being facetious...... is right.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

Why? There are humans running the state and humans running the city of Detroit. Whats the difference?

The difference is that someone from the state might have some idea about how a city should be run, whereas Detroiters have such inbred civic dysfunction that it seems they are incompetent to do the obvious.

While all those things might be true, Detroit lacks what most big cities lack and that is a sizable middle class tax base, sprinkled with a respectable wealthy class. When you have a city where such a large number of its citizens are poor, where so many businesses have divested from the city, where so many have abandoned the city.....the city cannot maintain the quality of life that it did when it was wealthier. A city of poor people can only afford a government with poor revenues....which means a reduced quality of services, regardless of what union workers make. All major cities have unions and such.

That sounds like an even greater justification for an Emergency Financial Manager. If Detroit does not have the necessary components to be a successful city (middle and upper income earners, profitable businesses), then outside help is even more imperative.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by Retroit

The difference is that someone from the state might have some idea about how a city should be run, whereas Detroiters have such inbred civic dysfunction that it seems they are incompetent to do the obvious.



That sounds like an even greater justification for an Emergency Financial Manager. If Detroit does not have the necessary components to be a successful city (middle and upper income earners, profitable businesses), then outside help is even more imperative.

What do people from the state know that people running Detroit do not know? I mean....the last time I checked Michigan has been ranked as one of the the worst states economically. Maybe Obama should appoint someone to take over this state and usurp the democracy of Michiganders.

The only thing that I can think of that the state can offer is less compassion and caring......to do whatever it takes....no matter its impact on the ederly, the young or whatever. In other words, the state offers uncompassionate conservatism on a city that needs neither.

[313Weather]

Indentured Servants hit every single nail right in the head.

I'm personally against the Emergency Financial Manager law, and I also believe Detroit's finances are unsustainable.

However, there has to be a delicate way to solve the problem without essentially accelerating the city towards its death. I personally don't think anyone in Michigan can do that, especially in the current political climate. A government is not a business and citizens are not expendable.

Even then, bankruptcy is likely still inevitable given the legacy costs. And when bankruptcy does eventually come along, it will in effect drag down the health of the region and state, since for all Wall Street cares Michigan and Metro Detroit is all Detroit proper.

As for my final point, save the crap about Detroit dragging the metro area and state down. No one told our genius leaders to shift the population from the city to the suburbs and no one told the state to draft anti-Detroit legislation. You reap what you sow, boo hoo!!!

EDIT: There should be a "I don't know" option as well, because that's where I stand.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

What do people from the state know that people running Detroit do not know? I mean....the last time I checked Michigan has been ranked as one of the the worst states economically. Maybe Obama should appoint someone to take over this state and usurp the democracy of Michiganders.

That's a good point. If it came to the point that Michigan was so bad that it was bringing down Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, etc., I wouldn't be opposed to Federal takeover. Then Obama can help us out with some Obama Bucks. But Michigan isn't much worse off than other states. And not as bad financially as others, like California. Plus there is a lot of variation in Michigan. Like you mentioned earlier, it still has middle and upper income earners to carry the load.

The only thing that I can think of that the state can offer is less compassion and caring......to do whatever it takes....no matter its impact on the ederly, the young or whatever. In other words, the state offers uncompassionate conservatism on a city that needs neither.

If you have no money, is it uncompassionate to give to the poor? Some people think that we have a money tree that we can use to give all the poor people everything they need. It doesn't work that way. You need real money to help the poor.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by 313Weather

No one told our genius leaders to shift the population from the city to the suburbs and no one told the state to draft anti-Detroit legislation.

But if the population has shifted of its own free will, then shouldn't that population be, in part, responsible for helping to clean up the mess left behind? The Emergency Financial Manager isn't "anti-Detroit". Anti-Detroit would be to sit back and let Detroit continue to self-destruct.

A lot of Detroiters are under this misperception that non-Detroiters want to see Detroit fail. This is not true. We want Detroit to succeed. We want Detroit to be just as good a place to live as the suburbs. You really can't blame people for leaving. The reason so many people leave Detroit is because the streets of Detroit have been taken over by a few bad people who are intent on harming others and the government of Detroit has been taken over by people who cannot make the difficult decisions that need to be made. It will take the combined efforts of all involved, including the state, to turn it around.