Hansen Clarke's bold idea

[R8RBOB]

Found this on HuffPost.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-ha...b_1096094.html

[Novine]

He's doing a good job of getting media play for an idea that's never going to happen.

[R8RBOB]

He's doing a good job of getting media play for an idea that's never going to happen.

It may never happen but I give him props for acknowledging that Detroit needs a bailout. Cuts only will not save Detroit.

[ferntruth]

It may never happen but I give him props for acknowledging that Detroit needs a bailout. Cuts only will not save Detroit.

Then Detroit is pretty much screwed. There is practically NO interest in giving Detroit any handouts, bailouts, whatever we want to call them.
Clarke knows full well this idea is DOA, and its nothing but theatre for the masses. This way he can turn to his constituents and say hey I tried, I deserve reelection - and he will get it. Thats the only reason that Candace Miller was willing to attach her name to it, she knows it will go no where and she can still say hey, I tried to help Detroit.

Hell, you wouldn't be able to garner support for this idea in the Detroit Metro area, yet alone anywhere else in the country.

[R8RBOB]

Then Detroit is pretty much screwed. There is practically NO interest in giving Detroit any handouts, bailouts, whatever we want to call them.
Clarke knows full well this idea is DOA, and its nothing but theatre for the masses. This way he can turn to his constituents and say hey I tried, I deserve reelection - and he will get it. Thats the only reason that Candace Miller was willing to attach her name to it, she knows it will go no where and she can still say hey, I tried to help Detroit.

Hell, you wouldn't be able to garner support for this idea in the Detroit Metro area, yet alone anywhere else in the country.

See this is why we have forums. We can share opinions. Here is my opinion:

Regardless if Clarke's plan is DOA, the fact is he is the first [[I think) who has acknowledge that Detroit needs some form of bailout. Here are the facts: Bing and the council can cut all the meat off the bone and they can cut into the bone but the city will still have money problems because of Detroit's population. The city needs home owners [[tax payers) to generate revenue. The city need money outside of budgetary responsibilities for new developments, new schools, improve services like fighting crime to woo people back to Detroit.

Again, cuts will not save Detroit because there has to be money coming in to offset the cuts and the money is not coming in.

[ferntruth]

See this is why we have forums. We can share opinions. Here is my opinion:

Regardless if Clarke's plan is DOA, the fact is he is the first [[I think) who has acknowledge that Detroit needs some form of bailout. Here are the facts: Bing and the council can cut all the meat off the bone and they can cut into the bone but the city will still have money problems because of Detroit's population. The city needs home owners [[tax payers) to generate revenue. The city need money outside of budgetary responsibilities for new developments, new schools, improve services like fighting crime to woo people back to Detroit.

Again, cuts will not save Detroit because there has to be money coming in to offset the cuts and the money is not coming in.

Express your opinion all you like - it doesnt change the reality that ITS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Detroit will have to find another solution other than standing there with its collective hand out begging for a handout.

The rest of the State and the Country would go apeshit crazy if we were forced to step in financially and take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. How Detroit gets out of this mess is their problem, not the rest of the country - thats my opinion.

[Scottathew]

A bailout would do nothing. Detroit must be forced to operate more efficiently. My guess is that it will have to be done by an EFM.

[mwilbert]

There are all kinds of ways of transferring money to the city--if you look at the budget you can see what a large portion is already funded by non-city sources. Those amounts could change and there could even be new programs at some point, but what is not ever going to happen is an explicit, Detroit-only federal handout, which is why I think Clarke's plan has no relevance in this universe.

[EastsideAl]

The fact remains is that Hansen Clarke is correct. Whether or not it's likely to happen in the near future is really immaterial. Without someone saying something that seems unlikely to happen, movements never get started. And we really need a movement in this country that commits our considerable resources to helping our actual citizens, and most particularly helping those communities that have been the most damaged by the economic changes partially wrought by our government's policy decisions.

This would sure be a better use of our resources than sending them halfway around the world in order to kill hundreds of thousands of other poor people in order to keep our politically connected military contractors happy. Or to continue other subsidy programs that mostly serve to feed even more of our resources to companies already fattened on corporate welfare.

Detroit, and the rest of the distressed post-industrial communities, have given more than enough to this country, including being the engine of our victory in WWII. It may seem unlikely or impossible that we will ever be able to fight vested interests enough to change the priorities of how we handle our resources, and who benefits from them. But unless someone starts this conversation about changing our priorities to serve our actual citizenry, and sticks with it, it is absolutely certain that change will never come.

[R8RBOB]

The fact remains is that Hansen Clarke is correct. Whether or not it's likely to happen in the near future is really immaterial. Without someone saying something that seems unlikely to happen, movements never get started. And we really need a movement in this country that commits our considerable resources to helping our actual citizens, and most particularly helping those communities that have been the most damaged by the economic changes partially wrought by our government's policy decisions.

This would sure be a better use of our resources than sending them halfway around the world in order to kill hundreds of thousands of other poor people in order to keep our politically connected military contractors happy. Or to continue other subsidy programs that mostly serve to feed even more of our resources to companies already fattened on corporate welfare.

Detroit, and the rest of the distressed post-industrial communities, have given more than enough to this country, including being the engine of our victory in WWII. It may seem unlikely or impossible that we will ever be able to fight vested interests enough to change the priorities of how we handle our resources, and who benefits from them. But unless someone starts this conversation about changing our priorities to serve our actual citizenry, and sticks with it, it is absolutely certain that change will never come.

I nominate your post "Best post on this thread"

As I stated in a previous post; maybe Clarke's plan never gets a vote and dies in committee but at least he is proposing something that everyone knows needs to happen. Bing tried a half-hearted attempt to get Detroit some money from the state but he needs to go bigger. The council, well all they are thinking about is saving their jobs. The idea that Detroit can balance its books on just cuts alone is nuts.

Just thinking on how this country can toss billions of dollars to nations to keep them afloat yet we have people arguing that Detroit don't deserve a bailout is sad. Maybe Detroit needs a freak earthquake to wipe out the shitty infrastructure and rotting homes that the city can't demolished and then the US government would have to spent billions to rebuild Detroit. Maybe Detroit can get a understanding Congress. I doubt neither would happen in my lifetime but who knows...

[Wesley Mouch]

I nominate your post "Best post on this thread"

As I stated in a previous post; maybe Clarke's plan never gets a vote and dies in committee but at least he is proposing something that everyone knows needs to happen. Bing tried a half-hearted attempt to get Detroit some money from the state but he needs to go bigger. The council, well all they are thinking about is saving their jobs. The idea that Detroit can balance its books on just cuts alone is nuts.

Just thinking on how this country can toss billions of dollars to nations to keep them afloat yet we have people arguing that Detroit don't deserve a bailout is sad. Maybe Detroit needs a freak earthquake to wipe out the shitty infrastructure and rotting homes that the city can't demolished and then the US government would have to spent billions to rebuild Detroit. Maybe Detroit can get a understanding Congress. I doubt neither would happen in my lifetime but who knows...

I wholeheartedly agree that there's a significant debt due to those in Detroit today, and now living elsewhere. And of course Detroit can't balance its books on 'just' cuts alone.

But do you suggest that 'Detroit' has zero responsibility? That this is just a money shortage, and would be solved by tossing money at it?

That's where we differ.

I do believe in federal responsibility for Detroit -- and equally with local responsibility and need for civic reform. They both must happen.

[R8RBOB]

I wholeheartedly agree that there's a significant debt due to those in Detroit today, and now living elsewhere. And of course Detroit can't balance its books on 'just' cuts alone.

But do you suggest that 'Detroit' has zero responsibility? That this is just a money shortage, and would be solved by tossing money at it?

That's where we differ.

I do believe in federal responsibility for Detroit -- and equally with local responsibility and need for civic reform. They both must happen.

Detroit, Wayne County, Oakland County, Macomb County, the state of Michigan and the US government is all responsible for the decline of Detroit in some fashion but Detroit needs to look to its corrupt politicians and business leaders to see the why Detroit is in the shape it is in now.

I would like to consider the Detroit that I and many currently live in is the old Detroit. A Detroit that has been plagued by racism, crime, corruption, abandonment, bad schools, bad services and the list goes on but we have Bing and Pugh bickering on how to save old Detroit. I don't want old Detroit saved. I want it to die. Throwing money to prop up old Detroit is a disaster in the making because like a house with a bad foundation, it will eventually fall to the ground.

If Detroit was to ever get a bailout then it would understood that the goal would be to build a new Detroit. A new Detroit with a healthy tax base which means people repopulating the city. This means new development of neighborhoods that has been abandoned. Improved services, new schools and the list goes on but this would require a lot of money because the old saying applies; "it takes money to make money."

[Wesley Mouch]

...
If Detroit was to ever get a bailout then it would understood that the goal would be to build a new Detroit. A new Detroit with a healthy tax base which means people repopulating the city. This means new development of neighborhoods that has been abandoned. Improved services, new schools and the list goes on but this would require a lot of money because the old saying applies; "it takes money to make money."

And to do these things requires change. If there is to be money taken from outside Detroit to 'help' Detroit, then it must be tied to thorough institutional change. Without that, you're right. Failure is guaranteed.

[mwilbert]

Obviously I disagree with the previous comment insofar as it relates to Clarke's proposal. Of course it would have made more sense to spend a trillion dollars on US cities than on a pointless war, but that would obviously not have been politically possible either. It is conceivable that you could come up with a program that would provide a lot of money to cities and that could pass Congress [[not this Congress, of course). That has happened in the past. But there has never been and is very unlikely ever to be a Congress that would be willing to say "Detroit, [[and only Detroit, because it is so special and people who lived there 70 years ago helped win WWII) gets to keep its citizens' federal taxes and spend them without any further oversight from Congress."

The conversation that a parochial proposal of this kind starts is likely to be short and unrewarding. Detroit's issues are not mostly about Detroit; they are about a changing economy and a concentration of poverty and dysfunction that is becoming a common pattern around the country. I think that a fruitful conversation has to be be about measures that are more broadly applicable across the US.

[old guy]

The conversation that a parochial proposal of this kind starts is likely to be short and unrewarding. Detroit's issues are not mostly about Detroit; they are about a changing economy and a concentration of poverty and dysfunction that is becoming a common pattern around the country. I think that a fruitful conversation has to be be about measures that are more broadly applicable across the US.

It's true. What's happening in Detroit is happening in most other places not only in the U.S. but around the world. Small towns all across the country are going through similar situations. I think a lot of people are watching what's happening in Detroit because they know it's what they're going to be going through in the near future.
Fifty years ago people in rural areas that were in decline had the option of rolling the dice and heading for one of the industrial cities. With that not being very realistic anymore, people in small towns that are going into default are scared too. It might not seem like it to most of you in Detroit, but we're all in this thing together.