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.
Okay, I go back and forth on this. But blaming the democrats is like blaming the captain of flight 447.
Detroit was put on a nose dive by the plan to grow detroit and the idea of a complex interstate system that pushed everyone to the suburbs. They thought they would grow both suburb and detroit but what happened was it created a donut, and detroit collapsed. everyone uses the interstates and just go to work in the city, not live.
So that plan. . .was at the peak and when the republicans and whites ran detroits. Then the plan blew up.
So much like the captain of flight 447 air france . . .By the time the Democrats got to the cabin, there isn't any time to diagnose the problem and right the ship
at this point I don't think either party has the stomach to do what is needed, put down about 1/4th of the city
Not really........ Look at your town Chicago. There isn't a Republican in sight..... just pick one you can blame for the mess your town is in....... Detroit has been a Hell on Earth since at least 1975.
Not really........ Look at your town Chicago. There isn't a Republican in sight..... just pick one you can blame for the mess your town is in....... Detroit has been a Hell on Earth since at least 1975.
Pretty much nonsense.
The white exodus from Detroit began in 1950...right at the peak of population and continued consistently dropping until current times. Black population increases partially offset it for a while but that peaked in the 1970s. So what you got is a long term abandonment of the city by whites and those with money.
The end is, of course, a civic structure that simply lacks the ability to sustain itself. Detroit is not going to recover. It is only going to get worse. Detroit metro has managed to segregate its poor into a separate city and has no interest in fixing anything.
One might dissolve Detroit. Leave it to Wayne County to dig out. About 1.8 million people including Detroit's seven hundred thousand. That really screws Wayne County though. Perhaps a multi county so the fix is spread across the metro area.
YOu could of course leave it alone and let it collapse. That though would probably screw everyone in Michigan as it became difficult to impossible to finance anything. It would also turn much of Detroit into a third world country. (Some would point out that is no change)
They had YEARS to correct whatever you claim Republicans did (a dubious claim to begin with since lots of cities didn't collapse due to interstate donuts being built).
They had years to see the writing on the wall and they kicked the can down the road instead.
Posted with TapaTalk
Okay, the "years" are akin to trying to rudder a plane without wings. I'm not sure what magical plan any party could pull off.
1) Republicans put city on crash course without chance of recovery (interstate system contributed)
2) As the donut collapsed, and the demographics of the city changed, democrats were brought in
3) Democrats were unable to repair damage of step 1
Look I figure you have maybe two choice here
1) accept the new population of detroit and signficantly shrink the city. No party (republican or democrat) likes to do that kind of thing. Govt does one thing, grow
2) Maybe. .address the issue. Setup a significant toll system similar to london, and use the funds to encourage central growth
But anyway, the excuse "well they had years to break the fall" doesn't seem that good to me. I think detroit was put in a nose dive. . .and it was soooo steep that there was no (and is no) fixing it. . .without reducing the city to the new reality.
Not really........ Look at your town Chicago. There isn't a Republican in sight..... just pick one you can blame for the mess your town is in....... Detroit has been a Hell on Earth since at least 1975.
?
Chicago (which isn't where I live, only was there 2 years) is doing fine. The amount of urban gentrification is awesome. Its a big city, there are bad areas sure. . .but downtown Chicago is bringing back people, and the glittering new skyscrapers (trump) and condos . . .Not sure what source you are looking to for a Chicago issue
I'm in the camp (as a independent, not democrat) that the correlation between a party and the cities future is often. . .just not there.
Wish you were more specific to the chicago "mess", because last time I was there it seemed to be going pretty good.
Okay, the "years" are akin to trying to rudder a plane without wings. I'm not sure what magical plan any party could pull off.
1) Republicans put city on crash course without chance of recovery (interstate system contributed)
2) As the donut collapsed, and the demographics of the city changed, democrats were brought in
3) Democrats were unable to repair damage of step 1
Look I figure you have maybe two choice here
1) accept the new population of detroit and signficantly shrink the city. No party (republican or democrat) likes to do that kind of thing. Govt does one thing, grow
2) Maybe. .address the issue. Setup a significant toll system similar to london, and use the funds to encourage central growth
But anyway, the excuse "well they had years to break the fall" doesn't seem that good to me. I think detroit was put in a nose dive. . .and it was soooo steep that there was no (and is no) fixing it. . .without reducing the city to the new reality.
Rubbish!
The whites left the city of Detroit a decade before Interstates.
Second, interstates and donuts didn't destroy other cities....there are loads of large cities with them.
Third...interstates INCREASE the business and industry of a city by making getting goods, supplies, and merchandise in and out of a city that much easier!
Funny how you don't accept the OBVIOUS culprits.....unions owning the Democratic politicians who in turn gave them ridiculous benefits and lifetime pensions.
The whites left the city of Detroit a decade before Interstates.
Second, interstates and donuts didn't destroy other cities....there are loads of large cities with them.
Third...interstates INCREASE the business and industry of a city by making getting goods, supplies, and merchandise in and out of a city that much easier!
Funny how you don't accept the OBVIOUS culprits.....unions owning the Democratic politicians who in turn gave them ridiculous benefits and lifetime pensions.
Posted with TapaTalk
Funny you can't accept the obvious.
Detroit was killed by white and monied flight. It began in the 50s and continued until at least 2010. The majority of the white flight occurred after the interstate was established.
Among large cities Detroit is quite unique. No other has lost any where near that gross number of people nor that high a percentage of its population and particularly its white populaton.
There are a number of other cities with corrupt democratic administrations and high paid unions...they are not collapsing.
And it is also not obviously fixable. Detroit is now virtually completely populated by an underclass that is poorly paid, highly unemployed and crippled by high crime. Dissolving the debt may make it better but Detroit remains ungovernable. There simply is not enough tax base to support the population.
Detroit was killed by white and monied flight. It began in the 50s and continued until at least 2010. The majority of the white flight occurred after the interstate was established.
Among large cities Detroit is quite unique. No other has lost any where near that gross number of people nor that high a percentage of its population and particularly its white populaton.
There are a number of other cities with corrupt democratic administrations and high paid unions...they are not collapsing.
And it is also not obviously fixable. Detroit is now virtually completely populated by an underclass that is poorly paid, highly unemployed and crippled by high crime. Dissolving the debt may make it better but Detroit remains ungovernable. There simply is not enough tax base to support the population.
So much discussion by people who know zilch about it.
Detroit was not destroyed by good right-thinking white people moving out. Industry did not follow white people out of the city.
If whites remained there, they would be unemployed to this day because of corporate conservative de-industrialization of America.
Why indulge yourself in these Fox Noise racist dogwhistle fantasies?
So you want to ignore the opinions of people who actually know something about it? Detroit's industrial base was not just concentrated within the city limits (which good white people fled), it is in the region and across the nation. Detroit city government has always been subordinate to regional industry which has its own agenda and answers to no one.
Titans of industry have discovered slave labor in third-world countries - in other words, they have just outsourced slavery from these shores. That's why industrial communities are suffering. It is "conservative" national business policy that has encouraged this. Reward companies to outsource, renounce the need for tax revenue, filibuster legislation for infrastructure and other jobs programs - all designed to destroy the economy for election-time political points.
Therefore it is not the exodus of good white people that caused the demise of Detroit. That is just a Limbaugh talking point.
We have no national industrial/trade policy like Germany's for instance, and we need to devise one which benefits Americans and the common good.
So go ahead, indulge yourself - and give Limbaugh my regards.
So much discussion by people who know zilch about it.
Detroit was not destroyed by good right-thinking white people moving out. If whites remained there, they would be unemployed to this day because of corporate conservative de-industrialization of America.
Why indulge yourself in these Fox Noise racist dogwhistle fantasies?
So you want to ignore the opinions of people who actually know something about it? Detroit's industrial base was not just concentrated within the city limits (which good white people fled), it is in the region and across the nation. Detroit city government has always been the subordinate of regional industry which has its own agenda.
Therefore it is not the exodus of good white people that caused the demise of the city. That is just a Limbaugh talking point.
So go ahead, indulge yourself - and give Limbaugh my regards.
I love you guys with one theory fits all situations. You preach utter nonsense but have gotten so ingrained in the issue that you don't know it.
Detroit, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Cleveland, Erie, Rochester...the whole litany of the rust belt cities have certainly paid a heavy price for the De-industrialization of the US. But Detroit is the one that crashed.
Pittsburgh has actually done pretty well. Others suffer. But Detroit collapsed.
What is different about Detroit?
Try white and monied flight. And convenient and available suburbs...
I love you guys with one theory fits all situations. You preach utter nonsense but have gotten so ingrained in the issue that you don't know it.
Detroit, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Cleveland, Erie, Rochester...the whole litany of the rust belt cities have certainly paid a heavy price for the De-industrialization of the US. But Detroit is the one that crashed.
Pittsburgh has actually done pretty well. Others suffer. But Detroit collapsed.
What is different about Detroit?
Try ...
Detroit tried to live in the past. Pittsburgh changed to a 21st century economy.
No industrial city will survive in its prior century form. We are moving ever more to a service economy, and there will be a need for less and less human capital geared to goods-production continuously.
I love you guys with one theory fits all situations. You preach utter nonsense but have gotten so ingrained in the issue that you don't know it.
Detroit, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Cleveland, Erie, Rochester...the whole litany of the rust belt cities have certainly paid a heavy price for the De-industrialization of the US. But Detroit is the one that crashed.
Pittsburgh has actually done pretty well. Others suffer. But Detroit collapsed.
What is different about Detroit?
Try white and monied flight. And convenient and available suburbs...
Detroit was FAR larger than all of those other cities you mentioned and far more reliant on the auto industry than those other cities. The other ones were more reliant on the steel industry, which has also gone south. I also don't think Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and the other rustbelt cities were all so reliant on one sector of the economy much like Detroit was.
Let's examine a city that was almost completely reliant on the steel industry. Gary Indiana. Pretty much a mini Detroit. In the 1960's it was voted one of the most liveable cities in the nation. Today it is an American tragedy and shed 20% of its population in the last census.
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.
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.
