We're going to be adding some advertisements to the forums! If you notice any weirdness around this or spot bad/inappropriate ads, please make a thread in the bugs forum.

Michigan Politics: Republican Judges No Longer In Majority

1246761

Posts

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    It's no surprise that someone like Rick Snyder thinks firstly in terms of dollars and cents, being as he is first and foremost a businessman. This, I feel, is the problem with making politicians out of businessmen; they tend to look at things in the same way they looked at their previous economic ventures in the private sector, very much dollars and cents affairs. But upon being elected or appointed, what they often fail to realize is that government is not a business, government is a service. And while it's true that a government should concern itself with the viability of its continuing solvency, it should first and foremost focus on how much good it can do for the community it was created to serve. Rick Snyder is not serving the good of Detroit's community by doing this.

    Unclear. The city is in crisis, and if the city government could not or would not make the hard decisions needed to save it, then this would be in the city's best interest.

    The more interesting question IMO is if an action which gentrifies the city and benefits new residents but does not help (or even hurts) the current residents is in the "city's" beat interest.

  • HacksawHacksaw J. Duggan Esq. Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    It's no surprise that someone like Rick Snyder thinks firstly in terms of dollars and cents, being as he is first and foremost a businessman. This, I feel, is the problem with making politicians out of businessmen; they tend to look at things in the same way they looked at their previous economic ventures in the private sector, very much dollars and cents affairs. But upon being elected or appointed, what they often fail to realize is that government is not a business, government is a service. And while it's true that a government should concern itself with the viability of its continuing solvency, it should first and foremost focus on how much good it can do for the community it was created to serve. Rick Snyder is not serving the good of Detroit's community by doing this.

    Well, it's more his primary goal is to enrich himself and his buddies/campaign donors via the wonderful world of privatizing vital public services. Notably education.

    Oh, no doubt of that. Synder is scum of the highest order. He's basically every businessman villain from every 80s movie ever come to life. I like to imagine he's doing what Mitt Romney would have done had he someone beaten Obama in 2012.

    JaysonFour
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    edited March 2013
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    It's no surprise that someone like Rick Snyder thinks firstly in terms of dollars and cents, being as he is first and foremost a businessman. This, I feel, is the problem with making politicians out of businessmen; they tend to look at things in the same way they looked at their previous economic ventures in the private sector, very much dollars and cents affairs. But upon being elected or appointed, what they often fail to realize is that government is not a business, government is a service. And while it's true that a government should concern itself with the viability of its continuing solvency, it should first and foremost focus on how much good it can do for the community it was created to serve. Rick Snyder is not serving the good of Detroit's community by doing this.

    Unclear. The city is in crisis, and if the city government could not or would not make the hard decisions needed to save it, then this would be in the city's best interest.

    This would be a better point if every single case of Emergency Manager action (save for one tiny artsy town of 1600 people) had not ended up with the town being just as bad off as before or worse.

    Viskod on
    Artereis wrote: »
    It's not your fault, Viskod. 1 out of every 10 people just happens to be a monster.
    Captain CarrotHacksawGnome-InterruptusMrVyngaardzagdrobSeidkonaEdith UpwardsMetzger Meister
  • FrankiedarlingFrankiedarling Registered User regular
    Are we seriously condoning rioting in this thread? Everyone, at some point, is wronged. The correct response is not indiscriminate violence and mayhem. What new madness is this?

    spacekungfumanSmrtnik
  • SummaryJudgmentSummaryJudgment Today we will paint a mountain that owes us nothing. Registered User regular
    Having grown up in Metro Detroit and remained in MI my whole life, my understanding of this is that it has less to do with race directly, but more to do with it tangentially as a result of years and years of hilariously bad (actively malicious and passively inept) governance of Detroit. I don't know how many people here are familiar with Kwame Kilpatrick, but the guy was basically Avon Barksdale, if he wound up becoming mayor of Detroit. Meanwhile, the corruption and self-dealing of the city counsel is perpetual, institutionalized along family lines, and basically the biggest open secret around.

    Having said that, the Emergency Manager Law is some bad, bad medicine. I haven't seen it come up in this thread yet, but a lot of what people are up in arms about isn't just the fact that the government is being de facto dissolved, but that the EFM has the right, apparently (what in the fuck), to ex post facto re-negotiate, unilaterally, all of the contracts the city has made that are ongoing.

    Pensions? Sure.
    Construction? Sure.
    Employment terms/salaries? Sure.

    Currently between signatures!
    Jibbazagdrob
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • JibbaJibba Registered User regular
    edited March 2013
    Having grown up in Metro Detroit and remained in MI my whole life, my understanding of this is that it has less to do with race directly, but more to do with it tangentially as a result of years and years of hilariously bad (actively malicious and passively inept) governance of Detroit. I don't know how many people here are familiar with Kwame Kilpatrick, but the guy was basically Avon Barksdale, if he wound up becoming mayor of Detroit. Meanwhile, the corruption and self-dealing of the city counsel is perpetual, institutionalized along family lines, and basically the biggest open secret around.

    Having said that, the Emergency Manager Law is some bad, bad medicine. I haven't seen it come up in this thread yet, but a lot of what people are up in arms about isn't just the fact that the government is being de facto dissolved, but that the EFM has the right, apparently (what in the fuck), to ex post facto re-negotiate, unilaterally, all of the contracts the city has made that are ongoing.

    Pensions? Sure.
    Construction? Sure.
    Employment terms/salaries? Sure.
    I guess my issue is that there's a lot of shit wrong with the EFM, but there's a lot of shit wrong with the Detroit City Council and almost every aspect of it for the past 40 years (even before Coleman Young.)

    With the end goal of unfucking Detroit in mind, how on earth do you actually start? It's like Italians with Berlusconi, only it's been running for even longer. Kwame established a lot of bad contracts, and people knew a lot of the terrible shit he was doing before his second election, yet they voted for him anyways. He had boatloads of supporters even as they were putting handcuffs on him. And it's not just him. His mother was an incredibly corrupt congresswoman and his father was a chief-of-staff to Ed McNamara, who you can also bet was corrupt to the bone as County Executive of Wayne County.

    The former president of the Detroit City Council is under FBI investigation for corruption and her husband is also a congressman. The "current" president of the Council is also part of the same machine and has no qualms about violating the Michigan Open Meetings Act and blocking the public out of proceedings. Now we have Bing fighting with Crittendon and they both make each other seem worse. The irony is that the City Council accused Bing of being a dictator for so long and fought him on every possible meaningful change, and without any of those changes, now they've actually got one.

    It sounds bad to hear they want to dissolve agreements over pension and construction, except at the same time those pension and construction agreements have been robbing Detroit blind for years, and they've all been set up by a series of corrupt politicians taking kickbacks. So is it really bad if the agreement Kwame set up between Detroit and his fucking fraternity brother that cost Detroit over $500 million is dissolved? On one hand they might be screwing people out of their pensions, but on the other hand there might not be anything to screw them out of because the money's already been stolen. Even the city's water supply is quite literally tainted, because of shitty deals and a lot of payoffs.

    Snyder is an asshole, but let's not lose sight that Detroit is and has been run by a bunch of assholes too. I don't know how you fix it. I don't think the Emergency Manager is going to fix it, nor am I sure it's even possible to fix it. I'm not even totally convinced it's worth saving.

    Jibba on
    spool32SummaryJudgmentSmrtnik
  • B_RB_R Registered User regular
    Are we seriously condoning rioting in this thread? Everyone, at some point, is wronged. The correct response is not indiscriminate violence and mayhem. What new madness is this?

    I'd support rioting against a mayor of my city who was never elected. This is exactly how democracy fails.

    Panda4YouEdith Upwards
  • Void SlayerVoid Slayer Very Suspicious Registered User regular
    Sorry, I was not condoning violence on the part of the rioters, but was pointing out that it is a false dichotomy that one side is being civilized and not violent and the other side is being violent rioters.

    You can bet that if the representatives of the city of Detroit refused to hand over power to the state appointed person that they would be arrested by state police.

    Both sides use violence to enforce their legitimacy. You can argue that the side that was voted in has the right to use force, but that is an entirely different argument.

    Rioting here would of course be goosery of the highest level since there are other ways to express your views and try to counteract this in a democratic society.

    He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Sorry, I was not condoning violence on the part of the rioters, but was pointing out that it is a false dichotomy that one side is being civilized and not violent and the other side is being violent rioters.

    You can bet that if the representatives of the city of Detroit refused to hand over power to the state appointed person that they would be arrested by state police.

    Both sides use violence to enforce their legitimacy. You can argue that the side that was voted in has the right to use force, but that is an entirely different argument.

    Rioting here would of course be goosery of the highest level since there are other ways to express your views and try to counteract this in a democratic society.

    A lot of what makes the state the state is its monopoly on the use of force. There is no comparison between the police power and riots or protest violence. One is legitimate, the other is not. End of story.

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Ah, yes, your well-known dedication to decorum as the highest possible good.

    It's not decorum. Rioters hurt or even kill innocent people, and destroy/steal the property of innocent people. Once you start harming innocents in your protest, you cede the moral high ground, IMO.

    And sometimes they hurt guilty people and destroy/steal property of guilty people. If you write off the claims/demands of rioters just on the basis that they're rioters, you cede the rational high ground.

    You live in a country that was founded by violent revolution against the "legitimate" government - and that "legitimate" government only existed because people had to resort to violence to change the previous "legitimate" government.

    In addition you need to understand that the decorum that people hide behind is actually backed up with violence.

    It is not the grand violence of rioters in the street but the little of violences from police and prisons, taking away your right to your home by helping kick you out, keeping you from getting the food and clothing you need for your child, punishing you for your addiction.

    The status quo is steeped in violence, look at the mostly peaceful Wall Street protests and the violent and deadly response.

    It lies just beneath the surface, hidden enough if you are the right race and class but ever present.

    If the ruling class is just, then the violence might be justified to protect the innocent. But the power legitimized by these threats are used for self fulfillment and enrichment at the expense of large swaths of society.

    There is a reason that we do not have larger protests in this country and it is less laziness and more that you will be arrested, lose your job and die in the street, rejected by society, if you engage in it.

    Redlining stole wealth from minorities, just as surely as a looter steals. Yet it was completely legal.

    And backed up by a paramilitary force built up for drug enforcement. Okay I guess it seems like I am heading into conspiracy theorist territory here...

    "heading into" ?

    heh

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Are we seriously condoning rioting in this thread? Everyone, at some point, is wronged. The correct response is not indiscriminate violence and mayhem. What new madness is this?

    It's not new.

  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Jibba wrote: »
    Having grown up in Metro Detroit and remained in MI my whole life, my understanding of this is that it has less to do with race directly, but more to do with it tangentially as a result of years and years of hilariously bad (actively malicious and passively inept) governance of Detroit. I don't know how many people here are familiar with Kwame Kilpatrick, but the guy was basically Avon Barksdale, if he wound up becoming mayor of Detroit. Meanwhile, the corruption and self-dealing of the city counsel is perpetual, institutionalized along family lines, and basically the biggest open secret around.

    Having said that, the Emergency Manager Law is some bad, bad medicine. I haven't seen it come up in this thread yet, but a lot of what people are up in arms about isn't just the fact that the government is being de facto dissolved, but that the EFM has the right, apparently (what in the fuck), to ex post facto re-negotiate, unilaterally, all of the contracts the city has made that are ongoing.

    Pensions? Sure.
    Construction? Sure.
    Employment terms/salaries? Sure.
    I guess my issue is that there's a lot of shit wrong with the EFM, but there's a lot of shit wrong with the Detroit City Council and almost every aspect of it for the past 40 years (even before Coleman Young.)

    With the end goal of unfucking Detroit in mind, how on earth do you actually start? It's like Italians with Berlusconi, only it's been running for even longer. Kwame established a lot of bad contracts, and people knew a lot of the terrible shit he was doing before his second election, yet they voted for him anyways. He had boatloads of supporters even as they were putting handcuffs on him. And it's not just him. His mother was an incredibly corrupt congresswoman and his father was a chief-of-staff to Ed McNamara, who you can also bet was corrupt to the bone as County Executive of Wayne County.

    The former president of the Detroit City Council is under FBI investigation for corruption and her husband is also a congressman. The "current" president of the Council is also part of the same machine and has no qualms about violating the Michigan Open Meetings Act and blocking the public out of proceedings. Now we have Bing fighting with Crittendon and they both make each other seem worse. The irony is that the City Council accused Bing of being a dictator for so long and fought him on every possible meaningful change, and without any of those changes, now they've actually got one.

    It sounds bad to hear they want to dissolve agreements over pension and construction, except at the same time those pension and construction agreements have been robbing Detroit blind for years, and they've all been set up by a series of corrupt politicians taking kickbacks. So is it really bad if the agreement Kwame set up between Detroit and his fucking fraternity brother that cost Detroit over $500 million is dissolved? On one hand they might be screwing people out of their pensions, but on the other hand there might not be anything to screw them out of because the money's already been stolen. Even the city's water supply is quite literally tainted, because of shitty deals and a lot of payoffs.

    Snyder is an asshole, but let's not lose sight that Detroit is and has been run by a bunch of assholes too. I don't know how you fix it. I don't think the Emergency Manager is going to fix it, nor am I sure it's even possible to fix it. I'm not even totally convinced it's worth saving.

    This goes to the question of what the "city" is. Is it the people who live in it now (who would benefit from renegotiating municipal wages and pensions)? Is it all the people who ever lived there or ever will live there (which may argue against renegotiation)? Is it the land in which people can live (in which case it might benefit from policies that drive most current residents out and draws in people with more money who need fewer services)?

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Jibba wrote: »
    Having grown up in Metro Detroit and remained in MI my whole life, my understanding of this is that it has less to do with race directly, but more to do with it tangentially as a result of years and years of hilariously bad (actively malicious and passively inept) governance of Detroit. I don't know how many people here are familiar with Kwame Kilpatrick, but the guy was basically Avon Barksdale, if he wound up becoming mayor of Detroit. Meanwhile, the corruption and self-dealing of the city counsel is perpetual, institutionalized along family lines, and basically the biggest open secret around.

    Having said that, the Emergency Manager Law is some bad, bad medicine. I haven't seen it come up in this thread yet, but a lot of what people are up in arms about isn't just the fact that the government is being de facto dissolved, but that the EFM has the right, apparently (what in the fuck), to ex post facto re-negotiate, unilaterally, all of the contracts the city has made that are ongoing.

    Pensions? Sure.
    Construction? Sure.
    Employment terms/salaries? Sure.
    I guess my issue is that there's a lot of shit wrong with the EFM, but there's a lot of shit wrong with the Detroit City Council and almost every aspect of it for the past 40 years (even before Coleman Young.)

    With the end goal of unfucking Detroit in mind, how on earth do you actually start? It's like Italians with Berlusconi, only it's been running for even longer. Kwame established a lot of bad contracts, and people knew a lot of the terrible shit he was doing before his second election, yet they voted for him anyways. He had boatloads of supporters even as they were putting handcuffs on him. And it's not just him. His mother was an incredibly corrupt congresswoman and his father was a chief-of-staff to Ed McNamara, who you can also bet was corrupt to the bone as County Executive of Wayne County.

    The former president of the Detroit City Council is under FBI investigation for corruption and her husband is also a congressman. The "current" president of the Council is also part of the same machine and has no qualms about violating the Michigan Open Meetings Act and blocking the public out of proceedings. Now we have Bing fighting with Crittendon and they both make each other seem worse. The irony is that the City Council accused Bing of being a dictator for so long and fought him on every possible meaningful change, and without any of those changes, now they've actually got one.

    It sounds bad to hear they want to dissolve agreements over pension and construction, except at the same time those pension and construction agreements have been robbing Detroit blind for years, and they've all been set up by a series of corrupt politicians taking kickbacks. So is it really bad if the agreement Kwame set up between Detroit and his fucking fraternity brother that cost Detroit over $500 million is dissolved? On one hand they might be screwing people out of their pensions, but on the other hand there might not be anything to screw them out of because the money's already been stolen. Even the city's water supply is quite literally tainted, because of shitty deals and a lot of payoffs.

    Snyder is an asshole, but let's not lose sight that Detroit is and has been run by a bunch of assholes too. I don't know how you fix it. I don't think the Emergency Manager is going to fix it, nor am I sure it's even possible to fix it. I'm not even totally convinced it's worth saving.

    You're confused, man. Detroit is run by Democrats, and is majority black, and in this thread those facts mean everything they have done is virtuous and good. There can never be any justification for a white male Republican governor to take any action whatsoever, especially since all possible actions he can take are evil, wrong, dishonest, and / or hopeless.

    Also it's not about race but it's the white people's fault for moving away. Moreover, if you don't like how things are going you're justified in rioting, looting, and burning down the city, because that's exactly like the American Revolution.


    8->

    spacekungfumanFrankiedarlingSmrtnik
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Lh96QHG.png
    spacekungfumanJuliusJibba
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited March 2013
    Detroit's fundamental problem is that it has been shrinking. It has a population of about 700,000 that are asked to support an infrastructure built for 1.8 million. Until the city can let go of vast tracts of infrastructure that are supporting the occasional household, it will not be able to finance itself.

    Since much of the population moved into the rich outlying suburbs, that's where I see the solution. Redraw the city with much narrower and economically viable borders. Attach the carved off pieces to the rich outlying suburbs and let them deal with it.

    Of course, I don't see how that would be politically possible. After all it would mean that the suburbians would have to start paying for at least some of the people that they were trying to get away from to begin with.

    I don't understand what SKFM is on about with gentrification. That isn't a simple question of putting up signs saying "rich white folks, move here!" The problem is that those groups left on purpose. What exactly is your magic bullet that would make them move back? Keep in mind Detroit's budget constraint. No fantasy policies.

    enc0re on
    Solomaxwell6zagdrobshryke
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    Given Snyder's track record probably safe to say that whoever he picks is likely to be ineffective. Given his party's current track record, I certainly would worry that whoever gets picked will look for any avenue they can to fuck over the people in Detroit because "the GOP gets pissy, like little bitches, when people don't buy their crazy bullshit." You know the saying, two wrongs don't make a right (I'm pretty sure most people familiar with Detroit know it has issues when it comes to gov't ethics).

    As AMFE said this really isn't new. The state coming in and running things when the local gov't fails has been going on for like ever. My question is how much of the current Detroit gov't is being left in place. IIRC most states like to go the sane route and only step in for the parts of a local gov't that fail, since that's easier to do and pisses off less people.

  • HallowedFaithHallowedFaith Call me Cloud. Registered User regular
    I was wondering how many pages it would be before I saw a Robocop image.

    Not disappointed.

    So how does this work basically, because I am dumb - is this, like, the state just takes over all the control of the finances and government?

    I'm making video games. DesignBy.Cloud
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    You're confused, man. Detroit is run by Democrats, and is majority black, and in this thread those facts mean everything they have done is virtuous and good. There can never be any justification for a white male Republican governor to take any action whatsoever, especially since all possible actions he can take are evil, wrong, dishonest, and / or hopeless.
    8->

    Here's an action he could have taken, he could have let the Emergency Manager law die when the people of the state successfully voted to repeal it, instead of passing a new one that could not be repealed.

    If there were more instances of these Emergency Managers actually being able to help the cities that they are put in charge of, then maybe not as many people would be that pissed off about it. But the system has done nothing but fail, and in one case a manager actively stole money from the city he was supposed to save.

    Artereis wrote: »
    It's not your fault, Viskod. 1 out of every 10 people just happens to be a monster.
  • spacekungfumanspacekungfuman Poor and minority-filled Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    Detroit's fundamental problem is that it has been shrinking. It has a population of about 700,000 that are asked to support an infrastructure built for 1.8 million. Until the city can let go of vast tracts of infrastructure that are supporting the occasional household, it will not be able to finance itself.

    Since much of the population moved into the rich outlying suburbs, that's where I see the solution. Redraw the city with much narrower and economically viable borders. Attach the carved off pieces to the rich outlying suburbs and let them deal with it.

    Of course, I don't see how that would be politically possible. After all it would mean that the suburbians would have to start paying for at least some of the people that they were trying to get away from to begin with.

    I don't understand what SKFM is on about with gentrification. That isn't a simple question of putting up signs saying "rich white folks, move here!" The problem is that those groups left on purpose. What exactly is your magic bullet that would make them move back? Keep in mind Detroit's budget constraint. No fantasy policies.

    You use eminent domain to seize a lot of the populated and unpopulated land and sell it to private developers, and use the proceeds to build up a downtown with cultural attractions like theaters, and let developer build new luxury properties in the surrounding area. You also provide business tax incentives to businesses setting up in the area. You may also want something like the "great mall of China" that separates Jersey City from Newport, in NJ. No direct roads or easy ways for people left in the "undesirable" area to get into the gentrified area.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    Yawning the yawn that couldn't yawn here.

    You can play semantics all you like, but this is not a change in status quo in this country.

    It also have little if anything to do with race.

    Lh96QHG.png
    spacekungfumanFrankiedarling
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    Detroit's fundamental problem is that it has been shrinking. It has a population of about 700,000 that are asked to support an infrastructure built for 1.8 million. Until the city can let go of vast tracts of infrastructure that are supporting the occasional household, it will not be able to finance itself.

    Since much of the population moved into the rich outlying suburbs, that's where I see the solution. Redraw the city with much narrower and economically viable borders. Attach the carved off pieces to the rich outlying suburbs and let them deal with it.

    Of course, I don't see how that would be politically possible. After all it would mean that the suburbians would have to start paying for at least some of the people that they were trying to get away from to begin with.

    I don't understand what SKFM is on about with gentrification. That isn't a simple question of putting up signs saying "rich white folks, move here!" The problem is that those groups left on purpose. What exactly is your magic bullet that would make them move back? Keep in mind Detroit's budget constraint. No fantasy policies.

    You use eminent domain to seize a lot of the populated and unpopulated land and sell it to private developers, and use the proceeds to build up a downtown with cultural attractions like theaters, and let developer build new luxury properties in the surrounding area. You also provide business tax incentives to businesses setting up in the area. You may also want something like the "great mall of China" that separates Jersey City from Newport, in NJ. No direct roads or easy ways for people left in the "undesirable" area to get into the gentrified area.

    Those things have been tried for over a decade. There are entire blocks available for amounts you can put on a credit card. The problem is that rich white folks are comfortable in the suburbs and don't want to move back; not that they are not being let.

    You'll also be happy to know that racial segregation has been accomplished already. That's what 8-mile is. Although Detroit is now only the fourth most segregated city in the U.S. It used to be first. So that's probably taking steps backward from your perspective.

    Machismozagdrobshryke
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    Yawning the yawn that couldn't yawn here.

    You can play semantics all you like, but this is not a change in status quo in this country.

    It also have little if anything to do with race.

    The one who is playing semantics is you. When an elected government is replaced by an appointed official, that is an inherently anti-democratic act. Now, it may be necessary, even positive, but it is still an act of removing democracy.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    Hacksaw
  • JibbaJibba Registered User regular
    I believe Bing had some sort of proposal to cut down the city size and to try and centralized people but the Council wouldn't have it.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    Yawning the yawn that couldn't yawn here.

    You can play semantics all you like, but this is not a change in status quo in this country.

    It also have little if anything to do with race.

    The one who is playing semantics is you. When an elected government is replaced by an appointed official, that is an inherently anti-democratic act. Now, it may be necessary, even positive, but it is still an act of removing democracy.

    Whatever dude.

    My point, which is obvious to anyone who isn't a reactionary, is that the legal, codified rights to self government are not interfered with here.

    In America, municipalities are subservient to state governments. Until that changes, emergency manager laws do not take away your access to American democracy.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    On the tangent that SKFM and enc0re are discussing.

    SFKM, the issue no one seems to want to move back to Detroit. I know at one point, they floated the idea of cutting certain services to a few areas because there was almost literal no one there. If it was a matter of getting a developer to buy land and build shit to attract people to move back in, they would have done it by now.

    Really one of there better options is to look into areas that they can let go because they don't have the revenue to keep everything going that they have. The problem is some people are going to like that, particularly if they are hellbent of staying in one of the areas that is technically the boonies of Detroit.

    I'm curious how much of academia has focused on the changes in Detroit because I can't help but feel their is a good opportunity to study how nature goes about reclaiming areas that use to be parts of modern cities.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Mill wrote: »
    On the tangent that SKFM and enc0re are discussing.

    SFKM, the issue no one seems to want to move back to Detroit. I know at one point, they floated the idea of cutting certain services to a few areas because there was almost literal no one there. If it was a matter of getting a developer to buy land and build shit to attract people to move back in, they would have done it by now.

    Really one of there better options is to look into areas that they can let go because they don't have the revenue to keep everything going that they have. The problem is some people are going to like that, particularly if they are hellbent of staying in one of the areas that is technically the boonies of Detroit.

    I'm curious how much of academia has focused on the changes in Detroit because I can't help but feel their is a good opportunity to study how nature goes about reclaiming areas that use to be parts of modern cities.

    The problem there is you can't just ignore massive swathes of urban decay in your city. People are still living there, or going in there and doing shit. Firefighters keep dying when buildings collapse because homeless people set up shop and start fires to keep warm and whoops.

    I mean, ideally we would be able to clean out the third world parts of the city, but people like Snyder will end up just letting the whole thing rot because that makes more $$$.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    If you selectively enforce a law against a suspect class, that's a pretty standard violation of equal protection. Which is what Snyder has done.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    shryke
  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    Pretty soon you're more or less going to have to because, again, nobody's living in that part of town.

    And this is NOT going to convince anyone to move back in. If this does anything other than accelerate the decline in the population of Detroit, I would be utterly shocked. You think that city's in decline NOW.

    Michigan has 16 electoral votes right now. They're going to have 14 at the most come next census because of this kind of thing.

    I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    If you selectively enforce a law against a suspect class, that's a pretty standard violation of equal protection. Which is what Snyder has done.

    Lots of other super bankrupt cities in Michigan, then?

    Lh96QHG.png
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    Obviously, if you could get people to move out, you'd tear down all the building that aren't being used for various reasons. Unfortunately, I don't think Detroit has the funds to do that given that they have building rotting already. I'm pretty sure whatever EM Snyder picks won't do it, nor will they make any effort to consolidate things because those all cost money and it's unlikely that there are many ways to recoup any of those costs.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    If you selectively enforce a law against a suspect class, that's a pretty standard violation of equal protection. Which is what Snyder has done.

    Lots of other super bankrupt cities in Michigan, then?

    This link is in the OP.

    And yes? Flint is kind of famously fucked. The whole manufacturing thing our entire economy was built on for nearly a century that has died a horrible death at the hands of globalization combined with mismanagement at the Big 3? Kind of hurt the whole state.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    Hachface
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    If you selectively enforce a law against a suspect class, that's a pretty standard violation of equal protection. Which is what Snyder has done.

    Lots of other super bankrupt cities in Michigan, then?

    This link is in the OP.

    And yes? Flint is kind of famously fucked. The whole manufacturing thing our entire economy was built on for nearly a century that has died a horrible death at the hands of globalization combined with mismanagement at the Big 3? Kind of hurt the whole state.

    Relinking things I read that did not convince me doesn't really do much.

    I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Detroit is a bigger drain on Michigan than Flint. I'm also going to go out on a limb and say that Detroit represents a bigger opportunity to give the private sector kick backs.

    But you're on pretty thin ground if you want to argue that this is a racial issue with a suspect class solution.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited March 2013
    And that's why one way or another the rest of the state will have to pay to demolish the unviable, abandoned parts of the city. But Good Luck™ getting a governor to understand that who'd rather live in his gated community than the governor's mansion. He has no idea of what community is outside of 'other rich people like myself.'

    enc0re on
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    Yawning the yawn that couldn't yawn here.

    You can play semantics all you like, but this is not a change in status quo in this country.

    It also have little if anything to do with race.

    The one who is playing semantics is you. When an elected government is replaced by an appointed official, that is an inherently anti-democratic act. Now, it may be necessary, even positive, but it is still an act of removing democracy.

    Whatever dude.

    My point, which is obvious to anyone who isn't a reactionary, is that the legal, codified rights to self government are not interfered with here.

    In America, municipalities are subservient to state governments. Until that changes, emergency manager laws do not take away your access to American democracy.

    And states are subservient to the federal government. How would you feel if the federal government passed a law that allowed for it to replace an elected state government with an appointed official? Would you feel that would preserve democracy.

    Furthermore, it is the local elected officials and bodies that tend to have the most direct and immediate impact on me. I like having a say in how they are comprised, and would see having that say taken away as a silencing of my political voice. And it seems that I'm not the only one, as the people of the state of Michigan repealed the emergency manager law, only to see it reinstated in the dark of the night, in such a way to silence their voices.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    Yawning the yawn that couldn't yawn here.

    You can play semantics all you like, but this is not a change in status quo in this country.

    It also have little if anything to do with race.

    The one who is playing semantics is you. When an elected government is replaced by an appointed official, that is an inherently anti-democratic act. Now, it may be necessary, even positive, but it is still an act of removing democracy.

    Whatever dude.

    My point, which is obvious to anyone who isn't a reactionary, is that the legal, codified rights to self government are not interfered with here.

    In America, municipalities are subservient to state governments. Until that changes, emergency manager laws do not take away your access to American democracy.

    And states are subservient to the federal government. How would you feel if the federal government passed a law that allowed for it to replace an elected state government with an appointed official? Would you feel that would preserve democracy.

    Furthermore, it is the local elected officials and bodies that tend to have the most direct and immediate impact on me. I like having a say in how they are comprised, and would see having that say taken away as a silencing of my political voice. And it seems that I'm not the only one, as the people of the state of Michigan repealed the emergency manager law, only to see it reinstated in the dark of the night, in such a way to silence their voices.

    State governments have protections given to them to keep that kind of thing from happening. I am not discounting the importance of local powers or saying I agree with Snyder's actions when I point out that hyperbolic crazy is hyperbolic and crazy.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    If you selectively enforce a law against a suspect class, that's a pretty standard violation of equal protection. Which is what Snyder has done.

    Lots of other super bankrupt cities in Michigan, then?

    This link is in the OP.

    And yes? Flint is kind of famously fucked. The whole manufacturing thing our entire economy was built on for nearly a century that has died a horrible death at the hands of globalization combined with mismanagement at the Big 3? Kind of hurt the whole state.

    Relinking things I read that did not convince me doesn't really do much.

    I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Detroit is a bigger drain on Michigan than Flint. I'm also going to go out on a limb and say that Detroit represents a bigger opportunity to give the private sector kick backs.

    But you're on pretty thin ground if you want to argue that this is a racial issue with a suspect class solution.

    Nah, it's just a coincidence that the GOP is taking away local government from majority black cities and most of the black population of the state. They would never do that.

    The Republican Party does not the benefit of the doubt on race, ever.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    Hacksaw
  • JuliusJulius Registered User regular
    Race is more a happy coincidence. And if I had to guess, how it would get overturned in the federal courts.

    What are you even talking about?

    The only way this law gets overturned is if the court gives a crap about the repeal of Snyder's alterations to the emergency management law and him just passing it again anyway.

    Which.

    They won't.

    No, I'm afraid the only solution is to stop electing assholes.


    And all this "death of democracy" shit can take a hike. Emergency Managers have been a thing for years. Whether they're effective or not (and my guess is they are not) is one question, but they're not taking your democracy away unless your state constitution specifically gives municipalities protections against this kind of thing (and my guess is that most don't).

    Yes it is taking your democracy away. Just because the law says that it's okay to do so does not change the fundamental nature of the act.

    Yawning the yawn that couldn't yawn here.

    You can play semantics all you like, but this is not a change in status quo in this country.

    It also have little if anything to do with race.

    The one who is playing semantics is you. When an elected government is replaced by an appointed official, that is an inherently anti-democratic act. Now, it may be necessary, even positive, but it is still an act of removing democracy.

    But not removing any democracy you have a right to according to the law of the land. It has been the case for a while. It is granted to you because it's nice, but you're not owed it.

    I know Americans really really love their local government-having, but it's not some violation of some right to democracy that the state has the power to take care of problems.

  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    Guys it's really not about race this time

    These are democrats and poors they are going after, that is what this is about, squeezing money out of poors

    them being black is probably just a bonus for Snyder

    Void Slayer
Sign In or Register to comment.