$300 Million in Detroit Aid, but No Bailout

Quote:

---

This first major infusion from the federal government, which administration officials say will not be the last, would be used to help clear and redevelop blighted properties, improve transportation systems, bolster the police — especially around schools — and overhaul city management systems wrecked by years of poor administration and inadequate resources.

The package follows weeks of meetings in Detroit and at the White House between the administration team and local business, labor and philanthropic leaders on how best to pool existing resources. Final details are to be worked out in a two-hour meeting of the federal and local officials at Wayne State University, participants said.

---

Quote:

---

Most of the roughly $300 million to come is federal money, with the state and foundations chipping in, according to the White House. About $140 million would go toward transit improvements, including $24 million to repair buses. An additional $100 million would go to blight efforts, including $25 million for commercial demolitions from combined federal, state and foundation money. With the planned $25 million in federal Homeland Security money, up to 150 firefighters could be hired.

---

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/27/us...pagewanted=all

What do you mean. This is precisely a 'bailing out'. Others are spending real money to cleanup Detroit's problems.

What does 'bail out' mean to you?

They should really quit using the B word and Detroit in the same hemisphere,it does not help much.

Most of these funds were already available year after year but were never applied for or their use was not applied correctly.

As you can tell by certain neighborhood conditions.

The whole DC trip was to take one by the hand and show what is available,Mr Orr did straighten out the city grants department so hopefully now and in the future they can be put to good use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

What do you mean. This is precisely a 'bailing out'. Others are spending real money to cleanup Detroit's problems.

What does 'bail out' mean to you?

---

it means the feds paying off Detroit's debts

It means more farmland. Detroit the ex-urban prairie.

100 million is hardly a bailout. Our government handed out hundreds of Billions to a few banks a couple of years ago....

The whole situation got so far out of hand its ridiculous. Not quite sure how to describe what washington is up to but whatever. it cant hurt. Whats most important is the $$$ actually get used and not returned to the govt from mismanagement, failure on 1 level or another, missed deadlines, etc.

Call it what you will but every little bit should help at this point. Can't hurt.

That 300 mills is indeed a major urban bailout for Detroit. Abandon buildings will be torn down, more police, fire, EMS force will responding in the ghetto hoods. This bailout is not for fixing Detroit's city government but is meant to clean the mess we make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

What do you mean. This is precisely a 'bailing out'. Others are spending real money to cleanup Detroit's problems.

What does 'bail out' mean to you?

---

I agree. This is a huge boost from the federal level. Rochester Hills, Warren, Taylor, Romulus, etc... aren't getting this kind of cash.

I'm not complaining that Detroit is getting it, they need it. Fixing Detroit will help the entire region in addition to the people that live in Detroit, who desperately deserve better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by detroitsgwenivere

100 million is hardly a bailout. Our government handed out hundreds of Billions to a few banks a couple of years ago....

---

Most of which was repaid with interest. AIG which insured a lot of the mortgages is still the biggest debtor.

More money to hire some fire and police officers is great. More money to tear down abandoned buildings is great. However, what caught my eye was the money [[$24 million) for repairing busses and installing security cameras on them. Don't get me wrong, that's a nice idea. However, in the long run wouldn't it be better to use that money for a light rail system and just replace busses overall?

I mean when a bus breaks down it's not in service. If it's not in service the security camera is not in service. Wouldn't a single light rail car [[admittedly most expensive to build) have fewer maintenance problems than a single bus? And wouldn't the cost of the security cameras and their use be more beneficial on a vehicle that is rarely pulled out of service for repairs?

I'm combining two different issues but in the long run my argument is about the efficient use of those government dollars. Also, I do understand that all transportation routes can't be serviced by light rail transit. However, given the costs to maintain a bus - diesel fuel and its polluting effects, replacing tires, replacing oil and repairing engines, this might be the moment when, as a region, we say, "It's time to invest in a transit system that's eco-friendly and low-maintenance." That $24 million could go to expand light rail on another route or get the M1 rail to Eight Mile and beyond. Just putting it out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finster

Call it what you will but every little bit should help at this point. Can't hurt.

---

I call it "the federal government going another $140 million deeper in debt". Don't forget, the feds are borrowing 40% of everything they spend. This particular federal spending is the moral equivalent of a "drunken sailor" handing over a case of stolen booze to someone who is just starting the 12-step program.

But it all gets rationalized away with a breezy "every little bit helps" and a "can't hurt".

As a nation, we are doomed.

I'm just curious to know how the money will be budgeted, managed and disbursed. How much will be paid to attorneys, accountants, case studies etc.

Historically, this is how a lot of the federal dollars are wasted before it actually hits the ground. Who will be over-seeing how this money is spent?

Kevin Orr?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royce

"It's time to invest in a transit system that's eco-friendly and low-maintenance."

---

No. Investing comes only after your basic needs are met. Otherwise you leave basic needs unmet while doing something else. The day for investing will come. But not now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royce

More money to hire some fire and police officers is great. More money to tear down abandoned buildings is great. However, what caught my eye was the money [[$24 million) for repairing busses and installing security cameras on them. Don't get me wrong, that's a nice idea. However, in the long run wouldn't it be better to use that money for a light rail system and just replace busses overall?

---

In a CNN story about the aid package.

"The next biggest chunk of money is nearly $140 million in transportation aid, including money to help renovate and rehabilitate city buses, adding security cameras to protect both drivers and passengers. There will also be support for a light rail system now under construction and support of a new regional transit system."

Sounds like they're trying to cover a number of transportation problems. I think light rail is great and it would be nice to see it everywhere. I think it's good they're trying to help that along but also providing aid to the bus system to assist a broader group of people who lack public transportation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royce

I mean when a bus breaks down it's not in service. If it's not in service the security camera is not in service. Wouldn't a single light rail car [[admittedly most expensive to build) have fewer maintenance problems than a single bus? And wouldn't the cost of the security cameras and their use be more beneficial on a vehicle that is rarely pulled out of service for repairs?

---

1. What percent of the bus fleet will be replaced by Woodward Avenue light rail? You still have to maintain the rest of the buses.

2. While new electric rail cars require little maintenance, the track and the overhead wire need constant attention. You can't use the more reliable and durable third rail on a street running system.

3. Will the street cars be provided electricity by solar collectors on the roof? You still have to burn fossil fuels somewhere to get the electricity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 48307

Rochester Hills, Warren, Taylor, Romulus, etc... aren't getting this kind of cash.

---

Once Rochester Hills, Warren, Taylor, Romulus, etc. are of the size of Detroit, then we can talk about them getting that type of cash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

I call it "the federal government going another $140 million deeper in debt". Don't forget, the feds are borrowing 40% of everything they spend. This particular federal spending is the moral equivalent of a "drunken sailor" handing over a case of stolen booze to someone who is just starting the 12-step program.

But it all gets rationalized away with a breezy "every little bit helps" and a "can't hurt".

As a nation, we are doomed.

---

Yet, nobody complains about the trillions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel. That's "ok" [[Waves flag). Fuck Americans. Fuck Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

I call it "the federal government going another $140 million deeper in debt". Don't forget, the feds are borrowing 40% of everything they spend. This particular federal spending is the moral equivalent of a "drunken sailor" handing over a case of stolen booze to someone who is just starting the 12-step program.

But it all gets rationalized away with a breezy "every little bit helps" and a "can't hurt".

As a nation, we are doomed.

---

Don't forget, the deficit has fallen under each Obama budget. the last time hat happened, who was the prez? oh yea, Clinton. NO republican in my lifetime has managed to do that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cliffy

Yet, nobody complains about the trillions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel. That's "ok" [[Waves flag). Fuck Americans. Fuck Detroit.

---

huh? libertarians [[Ron Paul, etc.) have been complaining for decades... not that Republicans or Democrats care to listen....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

Don't forget, the deficit has fallen under each Obama budget. the last time hat happened, who was the prez? oh yea, Clinton. NO republican in my lifetime has managed to do that

---

thats like saying my drinking has been reduced each year for the past 5 years, not mentioning that my drinking went from 5 beers a night to 20 just prior to that

Due to the recession, the deficit as a percentage of GDP spiked in 2009 to a level not seen since the mid-1940s. So it had further to fall than usual.
When Obama took office in 2009, he inherited a projected deficit of $1.2 trillion. He added another $200 billion in deficit spending to that. As a percentage of GDP, the deficit in fiscal year 2009 came to 10.1 percent. That’s by far the highest percentage over the last 60 years [[you have to go back to the World War II years between 1942 to 1945 to see higher figures). Over the last 60 years, deficits as a percentage of the GDP have averaged 2.4 percent. The deficit was 3.2 percent in 2008, the year before Obama took office; and it was 1.2 percent the year before that. In other words, it had a long way to drop from 2009.

It’s also important to note that deficits are one-year figures, and should not be confused with the national debt, which is a sum of the cumulative effect of yearly deficits. It’s nearly certain that the debt will more than double during the Obama presidency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeg

I call it "the federal government going another $140 million deeper in debt". Don't forget, the feds are borrowing 40% of everything they spend. This particular federal spending is the moral equivalent of a "drunken sailor" handing over a case of stolen booze to someone who is just starting the 12-step program.

But it all gets rationalized away with a breezy "every little bit helps" and a "can't hurt".

As a nation, we are doomed.

---

I agree. At some point everything is going to crash, the only question is when.

You know whats even funnier. These anti-government spending anti tax paying draft dodging fake patriot pro big business people are going to be in the biggest world of hurt if the government cuts spending.