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.
Let usw not kid ourselves. Detroit will be paid for.
The rational choice is that Michigan pick up the bill. But it is clear that he governor and legislature is against that.
The governor and friends wants the bill to be paid primarily by the retired employees of Detroit.
I am suggesting that the the local area would be a better choice...if Michigan as a whole is not available.
So you believe the right way to go at this is to let the Detroit retirees pay it?
Once again, what sense would that make? Forcing the other cities under water that are actually doing well makes no-sense. Michigan has no money itself, how exactly would it seize Detroit? The state already has sent in managers to cut everything and try to sell of the city, and while I don't agree with the state completely with what it's doing to the city, I believe this is the best the state can do itself.
And you propose to do what, exactly, with the 715,000 people still living within city limits?
Send them across the river to Windsor!
Get your couch ready...
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.