Free at last.
December 10, 2014 will be the day Detroit City government will be free from bankruptcy. Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr will resign.
here is the proof!
http://www.clickondetroit.com/consum...esday/30143168
YAY!
Free at last.
December 10, 2014 will be the day Detroit City government will be free from bankruptcy. Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr will resign.
here is the proof!
http://www.clickondetroit.com/consum...esday/30143168
YAY!
Freedom means different things to various people
the news said duggan will take over.
i thought the state was going to institute a financial board to run detroit, much like new york state did to new york city...
There will be a finance board, but it won't be running the city. It has to approve certain kinds of actions that have a financial impact, which is certainly a significant power, but not really running anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by compn
I don't see it as "free". However, we should've been "freed up" from that guy the minute he started making caustic attacks on Detroit without any evidence. He knew he was wrong for doing so, if he had to apologize for it. Than again, many feel he shouldn't have been brought in by the Guv'na without an election. Colbert chided LeDuff on that one with "What is it like to not live in a democracy anymore?" Anne C. Savage wrote a critique [[dated as it is) about Orr's "assessment" in Eclecta Blog.
The problem with democracy is people "forget" there are representatives voted in by the masses to make decisions
Snyder made a decision, acted upon it, ang got a situation remedied. This was a most elegant display of the democratic process.
as long as you forget the majority of michigan [[aka the masses) voting down the EM law in 2012, yes, democracy wins!
as long as you forget that our democracy is a representative democracy. Very few decisions are made at the ballot box. Almost all are made by our representatives. That's not a mistake, but by design.Quote:
Originally Posted by compn
The idea that the EM was anti-democratic makes no sense -- unless you believe in mob rule over the rule of law.
Did a majority of Americans vote to send an ambassador to Cuba? Was Obamacare passed by a majority of electors? Did the AFSCME contract in Detroit get approved by popular vote? No. We let our representatives represent us. They don't always get it right, but that's just an opinion. That they do get to pass laws, even unpopular laws, is the law.
the ballot initative is a rule of law, its in the michigan constitution. it is literally the mob rule of law. we have a law in michigan that says the mob rules. its not something to believe in, it is a fact.
how come people have trouble with facts? its crazyness.
dance all you want to, the legislature is the one who believes in the minority changing the law over the majority's will.
Merry Christmas, compn. You are right. It is a form for mob rule where a minority gets to decide. Rarely are our decisions made by 50% + 1 of the population. Never?Quote:
Originally Posted by compn
As a Canadian, I find the American ballot initiative system bizarre. Representatives decide laws unless they can't come to a decision, or won't because it might hurt them politically, then they pass the buck back to the voters.
Don, its not a way for politicians to avoid difficult votes, although it can be used for that. Its a way for the citizens to directly bypass politicians. I believe in most states the rules allow citizens to collect signatures and set directly to a vote. So as such it is at least as democratic as representative democracy as in your country.Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
The voter initiatives are much more to help hold officeholders accountable to the public. They know that if they veer too far to the edges, the voters just might 'redirect' policy.
They aren't widely used, but they can be very effective -- mostly to control governmental stupidity such as the amalgamation of Metro Toronto. One of the most effective uses has also been to control taxes, especially property taxes. Here's California's voter-passed Prop 13:
[quote]Section 1. [[a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed one percent [[1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent [[1%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.[/quote/]
Government is restricted there to a reasonable tax income -- and they must find ways to live within that limit. Its quite clever. Something for you to consider as your write your cheque to GO.
[QUOTE=Wesley Mouch;464019]Don, its not a way for politicians to avoid difficult votes, although it can be used for that. Its a way for the citizens to directly bypass politicians. I believe in most states the rules allow citizens to collect signatures and set directly to a vote. So as such it is at least as democratic as representative democracy as in your country.
The voter initiatives are much more to help hold officeholders accountable to the public. They know that if they veer too far to the edges, the voters just might 'redirect' policy.
They aren't widely used, but they can be very effective -- mostly to control governmental stupidity such as the amalgamation of Metro Toronto. One of the most effective uses has also been to control taxes, especially property taxes. Here's California's voter-passed Prop 13:
Quote:
Section 1. [[a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed one percent [[1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent [[1%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.[/quote/]
Government is restricted there to a reasonable tax income -- and they must find ways to live within that limit. Its quite clever. Something for you to consider as your write your cheque to GO.
The amalgamation of Toronto was not a government decree so much as an answer to municipal leadership on an important political issue. I think it is pretty clear that Ontario is in a better position to show Michigan how to squeeze some sense out of Detroit's political fracture than the opposite.
Ontario recognizes the importance of the driving force Toronto affords the province. That is a distinct quality that should rub off on its neighbor; Michigan. The fact that T.O. is the capital is not foreign to the decision making process of course. Meanwhile Toronto has a massive transit scheme that dwarfs Detroit's in all categories. It can even spare you a few cars and motorcycles on busy thoroughfares and highways it has in spades.
If I were in your shoes, I would look at what can I do to resume the kind of success metro Detroiters are wont to expect from their leaders' decisions on the subject of amalgamation, not avoid it at all costs, as you suggest. Merry Christmas to you Wesley Mouch!