L. Brooks Patterson Crying About Detroit Taking OC Jobs (Flint: 2013, rent)

[pokeable]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

They have been smug when getting their way, but at some point when profit is involved, we knew they would start eating their own - it always happens.

Because looking out for the bottom line is such a heinous trait. God forbid a municipality encourages business growth and control spending.

Love him or hate him, OC has flourished under LBP. Detroit hopefully can make it harder for him by actually trying to provide quality city services at a reasonable tax rate.

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by pokeable

Because looking out for the bottom line is such a heinous trait. God forbid a municipality encourages business growth and control spending.

Love him or hate him, OC has flourished under LBP. Detroit hopefully can make it harder for him by actually trying to provide quality city services at a reasonable tax rate.

But the point is that LBC does the same thing Detroit is currently doing but he has a problem with it. Many of those large companies in OC rarely expand in OC without some sort of tax incentive.

[RustBeltOptimist]

Originally Posted by Cliffie

Exactly. What's the worst possible outcome in this situation, seriously? Some highly-desirable office space opens up in crowded Oakland, while Detroit fills empty offices with employed people for a change! How horrible!

Increased tax incentives for companies for moving means more money gets saved by corporate HQ and more money goes to shareholders. Less money stays local. So Cincinnati wins, NYC hedge funds win, while the net benefit for the entire Detroit metro goes down.

People that are saying this is a zero sum game don't realize that it's actually less than that for localities when you're dealing with publicly traded or out of state companies like this. It really is a race to the bottom. Much more benefit could be gained long term by offering those incentives to small locally based businesses and start-ups, instead OC takes off a little out of the overall pie by undercutting tax rates and offering incentives for companies to move out there. What's the worst that could happen? Now Detroit takes out a little more by offering a bigger incentive for companies to move back... nothing wrong with that, it's just competition. What's OC's next move?

I was thrilled recently to learn that the ports of Cincinnati and Dayton have reached an agreement to share a common funding pool and not engage in this type of cannibalistic incentive game with companies already in the region. They'll get breaks to expand, but not to relocate. It's something you see in other regions of the country already. The competition is the South, it's the West, it shouldn't be cities vs. their own suburbs or even neighbor metros.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

But the point is that LBC does the same thing Detroit is currently doing but he has a problem with it. Many of those large companies in OC rarely expand in OC without some sort of tax incentive.

And the notion that "providing services at a certain tax rate" is responsible for Detroit's demise, is the epitome of narrowthink. OC has a tax rate? If intended, a pretty loose analogy there.
Yep, the corporate bedfellows will eat their own when they feel "jilted".

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by RustBeltOptimist

Increased tax incentives for companies for moving means more money gets saved by corporate HQ and more money goes to shareholders. Less money stays local. So Cincinnati wins, NYC hedge funds win, while the net benefit for the entire Detroit metro goes down.

People that are saying this is a zero sum game don't realize that it's actually less than that for localities when you're dealing with publicly traded or out of state companies like this. It really is a race to the bottom. Much more benefit could be gained long term by offering those incentives to small locally based businesses and start-ups, instead OC takes off a little out of the overall pie by undercutting tax rates and offering incentives for companies to move out there. What's the worst that could happen? Now Detroit takes out a little more by offering a bigger incentive for companies to move back... nothing wrong with that, it's just competition. What's OC's next move?

I was thrilled recently to learn that the ports of Cincinnati and Dayton have reached an agreement to share a common funding pool and not engage in this type of cannibalistic incentive game with companies already in the region. They'll get breaks to expand, but not to relocate. It's something you see in other regions of the country already. The competition is the South, it's the West, it shouldn't be cities vs. their own suburbs or even neighbor metros.

For the good of the nation, too bad there can't be some national policy on stuff like this ("states rights" will never allow such a thing), but even a regional policy was fought tooth-and-nail by the better-off Detroit burbs. We set the cities and states off against each other and wonder why the turmoil.

[Arthur Digby Sellers]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

Funny how, in the suburban mindset, "beneficial regional growth and prosperity" only applies to areas outside of Detroit. And still, they love to say it is all the locals' fault that Detroit can't prosper.
They have been smug when getting their way, but at some point when profit is involved, we knew they would start eating their own - it always happens.

Funny how "regionalism" only goes one way.

[mgkeith]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

Funny how, in the suburban mindset, "beneficial regional growth and prosperity" only applies to areas outside of Detroit. And still, they love to say it is all the locals' fault that Detroit can't prosper.
They have been smug when getting their way, but at some point when profit is involved, we knew they would start eating their own - it always happens.

An "us vs. them" mentality is detrimental to the region as a whole.

When businesses can be attracted to to the area from other countries or states, we all win--whether they set up shop in Detroit or the suburbs. Detroit is making progress towards being more attractive to outside employers, and that will benefit all of SE Michigan as well.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by mgkeith

An "us vs. them" mentality is detrimental to the region as a whole.

When businesses can be attracted to to the area from other countries or states, we all win--whether they set up shop in Detroit or the suburbs. Detroit is making progress towards being more attractive to outside employers, and that will benefit all of SE Michigan as well.

Exactamundo. As I have previously said, those inflexible municipal boundaries and attitudes aided in the demise of Detroit, but we must think globally as well imo.

Originally Posted by Arthur Digby Sellers

Funny how "regionalism" only goes one way.

What this mean? Only Detroiters want regionalization?

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

But the point is that LBC does the same thing Detroit is currently doing but he has a problem with it. Many of those large companies in OC rarely expand in OC without some sort of tax incentive.

That isn't true. I can't think of a single circumstance where taxpayer dollars were used to lure a Detroit company to Oakland County. But the reverse happens all the time.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by MS313

This gave me a good laugh, for all the sh*t he talks, I just wish I would have seen his face when he found out 5/3 was moving downtown. OC has been doing this to Detroit for years, now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's "grumpy old man" time.

Brooks Patterson to Dan Gilbert: 'Hands off our jobs'

I agree with you 100%. Karma is a mutha... It's easy to have a superiority mindset driven opinion.....until you finally have to walk in the shoes of the entity you condemned. It's time for him to shut up and suck up and live with the principles he exposed when businesses were leaving Detroit for Oakland C.

I do not see it as a game of musical chairs at all. The who region, as well as the state, benefits when its largest city looks vibrant. It does not matter how nice the suburbs of Detroit are in reality, those suburbs are not the face of Detroit. The face of Detroit is really not even the neighborhoods, but rather, the downtown area. The rebirth of Detroit, as much as we would like it to be the neighborhoods, initially, is downtown. Business travelers are not going to Mrs. Jones house for dinner and a show in Brightmoor. Thus, if her neighborhood is fixed up its not going to inspire investment like a booming vibrant downtown would.

I think the REGION and state is better served by investing in the city of Detroit at the expense of the suburbs...versus the other way around. Look what that got us.