The looting of Detroit Homes

[bartock]

[quote=Danny;154467]If you think that scrupolous real estate schemes involves with people is racism than indeed, YES. This is what the bankers and mortages companies see in their point of view.

OK, I understand that it has been shown that these schemes disproportionately affect certain groups of people. I think it is more like blind greed and economic law of nature that results in the racial bit, but we're close.

Blacks have been moving to Harper Woods neighborhood area for the past 20 years. This is due to better homes, good school district and hanging out with white folks. White folks in Harper Woods see this as a invasion just like in Detroit neighborhoods in the 1950s to the present and they would move out one by one, year by year. Older White families will move out of they felt uncomfortable when a black family moves right next door to them.

I've only been in Harper Woods for seven years, but I have not heard any of my white neighbors referring to the more recent accelerated influx of black residents as "an invasion." House on the corner was owned by white people who walked away from their mortgage, and none of us liked it. Family bought it for $30K, which fucked things up for the rest of the block in terms of housing values. None of us liked it. Black family moved in, they are doing their thing and are decent neighbors, etc. Nobody cares.

The bank will benefit by recieving City of Detroit money when 'they' get ready to sell the land within the looted home or the Mayor Bing's land downsizing plan and get more city money. Then the banks and mortages and real estate developers will benefit more profits by buying brownfields and greyfields from City of Detroit and gentrify into a pre-suburbanesque sub-divisions meant for the middle class. In the meantime the banks and mortage companies will benefit their profitability by continuing to invest in the well keep up Detroit neighborhoods that have full lines of mostly brick homes filled with hard working middle class. They are the landlords in that area. we so-called homeowners must pay the RENT as well as paying the state, federal, and local taxes.

Disagree a bit on this one. I think that is a much tougher route to profits than simply having a good neighborhood with rising values. The part about banks reinvesting in the neighborhoods that have hard working middle class folks only makes sense. I lived in Detroit apartments and own a rental [[in Berkley), and tenants do not pay taxes [[unless you are saying it is tied up in the rent rate).

Yes, these practices happen in some U.S. city, township, village and suburb. Minorities want better housing so those banks and mortage companies said, 'Give it try while to we build new better luxury homes further out in the open countries for whites. The 'burn everyting down, drive "those people" out theory' mentality has worked in every American cities for the past 75 years. In that area Whites don't want to live close Blacks, Whites don't want to live close to Hispanics and Mexicans, Whites don't want to live close to Native Americans, Whites don't want to live close to Asians, Now whites don't to live close to Arab Americans. Same goes with any other race in America. That ultimate goal to slum clear the poor black ghettos in every other American city has worked in the past and its working right now. Harlem, N.Y.C. is quickly being gentrified into to ethically diverse community, Washington D.C. saw the Black flight to the Maryland Suburbs accelerated in the 20 year alarming rate to real estate deals. In St. Louis, Missouri. few black ghettos have been slum cleared by banks and mortage companies. More whites are making a quick comeback to St. Louis, Missouri due to new regional growth. Regional growth is happen fast in Oakland, CA. as banks and mortage companies seized forclosed properties in once black almost slummy communities. This plan seems Hitler-esque but without the 'final solution'.

I think the metaphors are mixed here. I suggested the Hitler-esque thing because I thought that you were implying a scheme specifically designed to economically wipe out a race of people. Gentrification seems to bear racial connotations when it is really an economic, supply/demand description. I mean, really, the situation in Detroit is nothing like these other places. Harlem has often been compared, but they really are apples and oranges. Besides, there are those in Harlem that are saying "stay out" to white folks moving in. How is this any different than what some whites did before? It's very Sneetches, if you ask me.

Very confused by this - "Whites don't want to live close Blacks, Whites don't want to live close to Hispanics and Mexicans, Whites don't want to live close to Native Americans, Whites don't want to live close to Asians, Now whites don't to live close to Arab Americans. Same goes with any other race in America."

I don't besmirtch people for wanting to live among their own, and I don't want the government legislating whom we need to get along with or live by. The stuff about whites not wanting to live close to whatever race may technically be correct, but that goes for every race [[I agree with your last statement, but it seems in conflict with everything that came before it). Eventually, people just want to live near like-minded people, and familiarity breeds, you know.


"First it's real estate practices then it was racial alright before the socialeconomic stability sets in.

Hard to disagree with this one.

In Detroit's Northwest Side. Most neighborhoods become full blown black right after the organized Jewish Communities quickly moved to Oakland County cities like Oak Park, Southfield, Lathrup Village, Farmington Hills West Bloomfield, Bloomfield TWP and Commence TWP.

My understanding is that the Jewish Communities were in Highland Park, then moved to NW Detroit, then began spreading to the suburbs "ahead of the trend." My Catholic mother graduated from Henry Ford HS in 1968, and said that the Jewish community had been moving out of the area for as long as she could remember.

First the middle income blacks came, the low-income blacks. They mingled until it becomes a toxic mix of broken homes and kept up homes. When the banks and mortage companies sought this problem. Rather than exploit the property of well kept mostly brick homes. They fix them up, but the rest considered to be mostly wood frame homes will be exploited and turn into instant brownfields until city downsizing plan is complete. This will keep blacks from re-buying the vacant and abandon properties and fixing them up.

Again with the black thing. If you are saying "black" in the sense of the economic exploitation and not some sub-plot to obliterate a race of people from the earth, then I agree.

As for the churches being set up in each and every last Detroit black ghettoes. Yes they are doing fine it the time. But the Gospel of Jesus Christ needs to be heard outside the tabernacle. Most Detroit ghettohoods are filled with lost souls the need converting into the Christian faith right away. That way their broken homes will be fixed and they would be able to stop those banks, mortage companies and city from slum clear them out of their homes.

In my opinion the message of Christianity has a strong component of self-responsibility. Many of the albeit limited sermons and speeches I have heard from these pastors is "you are great. Trust in God. Don't worry about a thing" stuff that sells for 15% of a person's income. Of course, the real message of "it starts with you" gets lost in the cheerleading. Sharpton has credibility in some places, and it was refreshing to se him give that message a couple of weeks ago after that little girl was shot on Lillifield.

I say that I love my Catholic faith, but have problems with the Catholic church.

Because fixing Detroit takes action NOT TALK!

Amen to that.

[Goose]

Yes, these practices happen in some U.S. city, township, village and suburb. Minorities want better housing so those banks and mortage companies said, 'Give it try while to we build new better luxury homes further out in the open countries for whites. The 'burn everyting down, drive "those people" out theory' mentality has worked in every American cities for the past 75 years. In that area Whites don't want to live close Blacks, Whites don't want to live close to Hispanics and Mexicans, Whites don't want to live close to Native Americans, Whites don't want to live close to Asians, Now whites don't to live close to Arab Americans. Same goes with any other race in America. That ultimate goal to slum clear the poor black ghettos in every other American city has worked in the past and its working right now. Harlem, N.Y.C. is quickly being gentrified into to ethically diverse community, Washington D.C. saw the Black flight to the Maryland Suburbs accelerated in the 20 year alarming rate to real estate deals. In St. Louis, Missouri. few black ghettos have been slum cleared by banks and mortage companies. More whites are making a quick comeback to St. Louis, Missouri due to new regional growth. Regional growth is happen fast in Oakland, CA. as banks and mortage companies seized forclosed properties in once black almost slummy communities. This plan seems Hitler-esque but without the 'final solution'.

sounds like you have the white man all figured out, we all don't want to live anywhere but next to other caucasions... the blonder and whiter the better...

doesn't sound racist at all.... minimally bigoted....

[fryar]

Hi Danny,
I'm still pretty new to this board, but I have seen some interesting discussions here that make it pretty clear that there is a whole us-vs-them mentality in Detroit that is really not helpful to fixing anything. I think that's what's going on here with these rumors you've heard. The persistently bad economy just lays bare all of the rough edges we have as people, and makes things much harder.
The bank's business model cannot be to fool a bunch of less affluent folks into taking out a mortgage so that the bank can later foreclose on the house and strip out the wiring. This is just not a sustainable approach to making money. That wiring is not worth anywhere in the same ballpark as much as the mortgage that would have been taken out on that house, i.e. the loan the bank made, i.e. the money the bank already spent.
We know now that a huge problem in the housing boom was that subprime mortgages made to individuals whose creditworthyness was questionable [[or worse) were equated with those made to more creditworthy buyers by bankers and the investors to whom they sold these mortgages. It's a bit circular, but the logic is that you sell a bunch of loans to someone desperate for a safe investment - an oil sheik or a European state bank trying to rebrand itself as a serious investment house. Then you point to the historical repayment rate on mortgages, argue that American mortgages are a safe investment. And nobody asks to see whether maybe the historical data is based on a time when banks really held onto the mortgages, and therefore made sure the borrower was worth taking a risk on, since the bank's existence was tied to the borrower's ability to repay the loan. Which, in turn, is not the case if you're just going to sell the loan to Wall Street, which is why you can start getting into mortgages you wouldn't make if you didn't think you could just sell the loan to some idiot.
On the fringes of all of this, someone could have decided that some money was to be made by making a bad mortgage to someone and then foreclosing on the house in order to resell it at a profit due to rising home prices. But then why not just buy the house and flip it? Cause this person just hates black people? Planning to foreclose on homes in Detroit after an economic crisis forces people to abandon their homes in order to then hold that land until the economy improves is a business plan for bankruptcy, it just doesn't make sense.
I can well imagine that a lot of Detroiters were victimized by scammers who sold liar's loans and other credit products to individuals that did not qualify for a traditional mortgage -and- who responded to advertising designed to sucker them in. But this was a national issue that is not just specific to Detroit.
What is specific to Detroit is the drastic degree of economic depression, and the fact that these us-vs-them antagonisms that are legacies of a lengthy list of undeniably evil stuff that was done a long time ago are still present and relevant. It might not be the only place in the country where these two things apply, but it's definitely one of them.
Is anybody really expecting to make a lot of money off of Detroit's shrinking? Where's that money going to come from? As far as the rest of the country is concerned, Detroit has already gotten yet another bail out from Washington.
I would think that the shrinking of Detroit is going to be extremely painful for everybody involved.
None of this makes it easy, of course, to suffer through an eviction, or to have it happen down the street.

[Danny]

Bartok sez... "I've only been in Harper Woods for seven years, but I have not heard any of my white neighbors referring to the more recent accelerated influx of black residents as "an invasion." House on the corner was owned by white people who walked away from their mortgage, and none of us liked it. Family bought it for $30K, which fucked things up for the rest of the block in terms of housing values. None of us liked it. Black family moved in, they are doing their thing and are decent neighbors, etc. Nobody cares."

You didn't even ask a White Harper Woods family when they see a influx a black folks from Detroit moving into that area. However I do know that more blacks are moving to Harper Woods neighborhoods. The evidence that supports my thesis is from the 2000 U.S. Census when the black population in Harper Woods is 10 percent. After the 2010 U.S. Census the black population of Harper Woods would be more than 20 percent. It's mostly the middle class blacks in order to keep property values up. However also property values can do down when another race moves into the certian area. Blacks moving in, whites moving out in certian neighborhoods is like 'an invasion' not in 1st person when you quote your comments but second person.

"Disagree a bit on this one. I think that is a much tougher route to profits than simply having a good neighborhood with rising values. The part about banks reinvesting in the neighborhoods that have hard working middle class folks only makes sense. I lived in Detroit apartments and own a rental [[in Berkley), and tenants do not pay taxes [[unless you are saying it is tied up in the rent rate)."


The banks who owns a property can do whatever they want with it. There is no debate not any disagreements on capital property. Your quote is NON SEQUITUR. Please examine theory about capital property before posting your point of views. My comment that I have wrote about banks, mortage companies linking to downsizing into brownfields is an ethical scientific conclusion.

"My understanding is that the Jewish Communities were in Highland Park, then moved to NW Detroit, then began spreading to the suburbs "ahead of the trend." My Catholic mother graduated from Henry Ford HS in 1968, and said that the Jewish community had been moving out of the area for as long as she could remember."


You may need some are more information about the origanized Jewish community in Detroit. The Jews came to Detroit in the mid 1850s. They settled near Hastings Street and E. Jefferson Ave. mingling with the Germans, Irish, Polish, Italians and of course freed negroes [[ who settled at Black Bottom Area) The Jews expanded their communities up on Paradise Valley [[ Hastings St.) Blacks also made their community there. When the Jews moved to the West Side of Detroit, the blacks followed. When the Jews moved to Northwest side of Detroit, the blacks followed. When the Jews moved to Oak Park, blacks followed. When the Jews moved to Southfield, blacks followed. JJaba, a long time Detroityes forum member quoted that an organized Jewish community moves to another area ever 25 years and he was right. " I sugesst that you read 'Jewish Detroit' from Images from America. You would find some strong evidence right before your eyes.


WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET


Keep on with your research before your post any comments for Neda Agha Soltan's sake.

[Danny]

sounds like you have the white man all figured out, we all don't want to live anywhere but next to other caucasions... the blonder and whiter the better...

doesn't sound racist at all.... minimally bigoted....

Look at the basic human construct of instinct. People of color can be friends with people of color. It's just people of color don't want to live near people of color all the time. Racism exists out of mythological construct of FEAR, COWARDISE, HATRED AND SUPERIORITY. From the beginning of human evolution and to the future.

[bartock]

You didn't even ask a White Harper Woods family when they see a influx a black folks from Detroit moving into that area. However I do know that more blacks are moving to Harper Woods neighborhoods. The evidence that supports my thesis is from the 2000 U.S. Census when the black population in Harper Woods is 10 percent. After the 2010 U.S. Census the black population of Harper Woods would be more than 20 percent. It's mostly the middle class blacks in order to keep property values up. However also property values can do down when another race moves into the certian area. Blacks moving in, whites moving out in certian neighborhoods is like 'an invasion' not in 1st person when you quote your comments but second person.

Oh, I see. You're playing "evil bank" with my politeness and suggesting that you are "bringing more" of what you call evidence to the table.

I AM a member of a Harper Woods White Family, I talk to my mostly white neighbors [[sometimes, just out of the goodness of my heart, I will talk to my black ones also. Hope the sarcasm doesn't get past you, but your assumptions suggest that it will). I have eyes and don't need the census numbers [[which are projected to be higher than your 20%, but WHO CARES) to tell me what is happening. Don't start with that evidence bullshit. YOU want to believe that WHITES see these trends as invasions.

The banks who owns a property can do whatever they want with it. There is no debate not any disagreements on capital property. Your quote is NON SEQUITUR. Please examine theory about capital property before posting your point of views. My comment that I have wrote about banks, mortage companies linking to downsizing into brownfields is an ethical scientific conclusion.

If my statement about capital property is not a disagreement, then it is a tautology, not a non sequitor, but I won't let English get in the way of your wordsmith masturbations.

...and so you are saying that banks are doing this as a matter of ethics, and I assume this goes back to your racism conspiracy theory.


You may need some are more information about the origanized Jewish community in Detroit. The Jews came to Detroit in the mid 1850s. They settled near Hastings Street and E. Jefferson Ave. mingling with the Germans, Irish, Polish, Italians and of course freed negroes [[ who settled at Black Bottom Area) The Jews expanded their communities up on Paradise Valley [[ Hastings St.) Blacks also made their community there. When the Jews moved to the West Side of Detroit, the blacks followed. When the Jews moved to Northwest side of Detroit, the blacks followed. When the Jews moved to Oak Park, blacks followed. When the Jews moved to Southfield, blacks followed. JJaba, a long time Detroityes forum member quoted that an organized Jewish community moves to another area ever 25 years and he was right. " I sugesst that you read 'Jewish Detroit' from Images from America. You would find some strong evidence right before your eyes.

What are you talking about? You are telling me to look at an Images from America book to get "educated?" Now that's funny, I'll set aside a 10 minute bathroom break and do just that...and the book of which you speak I believe is subtitled 1945-present and talks about the Jewish migration to the suburbs in this area. I am especially interested in the part of the book that talks about the blacks "following" the Jews wherever they moved. I'm sure it's in the index.

I didn't claim to come with any evidence as the discussion is based on rumor to begin with. Or did you forget that? I promise when I get the time I'll get a quote from my mother, maybe a link to classmates.com and "prove" without a doubt, that she did graduate from Henry Ford High School in 1968.

...and please, Jewish migration in Detroit, conspiracy theories by banks, etc. The agenda is pretty thinly veiled.


Keep on with your research before your post any comments for Neda Agha Soltan's sake.[/quote]

Pathetic statement.

[bartock]

...and in my ramble, Danny, I neglected to mention that as part of the discussion I did not feel the need to trace the entire history of the Jewish population of Detroit. I would have thought, given the discussion, that it was assumed we were going post-war [[II) forward. I'll stand by my statements on that. Moving in after someone moves out does not constitute the insuation of "following."

[Danny]

Fryar sez... "Hi Danny,
I'm still pretty new to this board, but I have seen some interesting discussions here that make it pretty clear that there is a whole us-vs-them mentality in Detroit that is really not helpful to fixing anything. I think that's what's going on here with these rumors you've heard. The persistently bad economy just lays bare all of the rough edges we have as people, and makes things much harder.
The bank's business model cannot be to fool a bunch of less affluent folks into taking out a mortgage so that the bank can later foreclose on the house and strip out the wiring. This is just not a sustainable approach to making money. That wiring is not worth anywhere in the same ballpark as much as the mortgage that would have been taken out on that house, i.e. the loan the bank made, i.e. the money the bank already spent.
We know now that a huge problem in the housing boom was that subprime mortgages made to individuals whose creditworthyness was questionable [[or worse) were equated with those made to more creditworthy buyers by bankers and the investors to whom they sold these mortgages. It's a bit circular, but the logic is that you sell a bunch of loans to someone desperate for a safe investment - an oil sheik or a European state bank trying to rebrand itself as a serious investment house. Then you point to the historical repayment rate on mortgages, argue that American mortgages are a safe investment. And nobody asks to see whether maybe the historical data is based on a time when banks really held onto the mortgages, and therefore made sure the borrower was worth taking a risk on, since the bank's existence was tied to the borrower's ability to repay the loan. Which, in turn, is not the case if you're just going to sell the loan to Wall Street, which is why you can start getting into mortgages you wouldn't make if you didn't think you could just sell the loan to some idiot."

The housing boom to the housing crash is all from the Reagonomics and the relationship between the banks and congress to Bush Politics starting with his long time friend Allan Greenspan. Congress lets them like J.P. Morgan Chase, AIG, Comerica, Wells Fargo, Leaman Bros, Fanny Mae and Fredie Mac. to be treated as a same rights according to the fourteen the Amendent of the Bill of Rights to have the same rights as a human beings compared in the media corporations. The result of the matter, surprime mortages, Collateral Debt Obligations, Lair Loans, and stupid people browing too much money. WE ARE IN DEBT! When their jobs dissapears their house dissapears, too. If we Americans don't know the historical relevance of capitalism, then we don't what were doing to achieve the dream. Buying a house at a full price is very difficult. Buying a house with a bank loan is easy, but hard to get out of it.


"On the fringes of all of this, someone could have decided that some money was to be made by making a bad mortgage to someone and then foreclosing on the house in order to resell it at a profit due to rising home prices. But then why not just buy the house and flip it? Cause this person just hates black people? Planning to foreclose on homes in Detroit after an economic crisis forces people to abandon their homes in order to then hold that land until the economy improves is a business plan for bankruptcy, it just doesn't make sense.
I can well imagine that a lot of Detroiters were victimized by scammers who sold liar's loans and other credit products to individuals that did not qualify for a traditional mortgage -and- who responded to advertising designed to sucker them in. But this was a national issue that is not just specific to Detroit."

Lots of Detroiters are victimized by scrupolous real estate brokers, banks and mortage companies for years. Racism has always and will play a part. Years ago its by 1st person sentence. Now its by 2nd person sentence. Scrupolous real estate brokers, banks and mortage companies back then even hire Black kids to ride their bikes through a once White Detroit nieghborhood so that their hearts will be harden enough to sell their home and move to the suburbs. Black Detroiters who were destined to by a decent home back in the 1960s to the 1980s were BAMBOOZED by various real estate brokers, banks mortage companies. Most Black Detroiters didn't follow up on monetary pratices of capital property investment. Once you have brought a refinance a home, you're part of a Wall Street stock derivative casino. Most Black Detroiters will NEVER officially own a home, they will just pay RENT for 'X' amount of years plus interest and taxes.

In the meantime the banks way to foreclose a certian Detroit home in a ghetto is their way to prevent Blacks to re-buy, force city leaders to downsize the area to brownfield and later gentrify it to pre-suburban wonderland. It's their scheme and its working.



"What is specific to Detroit is the drastic degree of economic depression, and the fact that these us-vs-them antagonisms that are legacies of a lengthy list of undeniably evil stuff that was done a long time ago are still present and relevant. It might not be the only place in the country where these two things apply, but it's definitely one of them.
Is anybody really expecting to make a lot of money off of Detroit's shrinking? Where's that money going to come from? As far as the rest of the country is concerned, Detroit has already gotten yet another bail out from Washington.
I would think that the shrinking of Detroit is going to be extremely painful for everybody involved.
None of this makes it easy, of course, to suffer through an eviction, or to have it happen down the street."

This practice of real estate blockbusting in Detroit ghettohoods from banks and mortage companies is completely unethical. There is no money to be made from a scrapped house. However there is money to be made once city leaders downsize the area and development comes. In the meantime more homes in Detroit will be scrapped. More vacant lots will appears and low-income folks will be put out.


WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET

As the watch the end of Black Detroit

In memoriam: Neda Agha Soltan

[JBMcB]

The bank will benefit by recieving City of Detroit money when 'they' get ready to sell the land within the looted home or the Mayor Bing's land downsizing plan and get more city money.

What city money? The city doesn't have any money, and probably won't for the foreseeable future. If anything, the city will use eminent domain to grab 'underutilized' properties for pennies on the dollar. The mortgage holder isn't going to make anything on that deal.

Then the banks and mortages and real estate developers will benefit more profits by buying brownfields and greyfields from City of Detroit and gentrify into a pre-suburbanesque sub-divisions meant for the middle class.

So, after buying up cheap houses in the hopes the city will somehow cough up enough money to buy them back from the bank at a profit, the banks will then dump money into land that will require further investment just to make it safe to develop on? Why wouldn't they just redevelop the land they had just sold? Brownfield cleanups cost a lot of money, as does demolition of existing structures, and are only worth it if there is otherwise a shortage of land available for development. There is no shortage of land for development in Detroit right now, nor in the forseeable future.

[Russix]

I think it’s time for a documentary!!!!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2696194771594185697#

Safe as Houses? – Part 5 of the 4 hour documentary “The Ascent of Money”. This 48 min episode explores the history of the Housing Market with a complete summary of home ownership specifically in Detroit.

[Goose]

I think it’s time for a documentary!!!!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2696194771594185697#

Safe as Houses? – Part 5 of the 4 hour documentary “The Ascent of Money�. This 48 min episode explores the history of the Housing Market with a complete summary of home ownership specifically in Detroit.

micro-finance become loan sharking as soon as there is a profite established...

no security loan?? right... the security is your kneecaps, or the lives or you and/or your family

sure it gets paid back, every penny, because there aren't any other options....

[detroitsgwenivere]

All of this bold face print is making my eyes bounce around in my skull.....

We all know that if you don't pay your mortgage you will lose your home. AND we all know that banks are f*ckin blood suckers. I think the issue up for debate is how and why these homes end up gutted and torched so systematically.

It does seem funny how my neighborhood had maybe three fires the first 2 years I've lived here, and after Bing's announcement about downsizing a few months ago, we've had more than double that. The word in the paper was that large tracts of land were desired by the banks for re-development, the very banks who are running folks out of their homes without a hint of negotiation.

It seems very disproportionate in Detroit compared to other places, hence the conspiracy theory. This isn't just some quacks idea of starting a thread, LOTS of intelligent people are discussing these things. Also, several cities across the country are suing the banks and mortgage companies for predatory lending. Predatory i.e.: LOW-INCOME PEOPLE, something Detroit has plenty of.

[xphillipjrx]

There was a recent story in the Freep about the multi-million dollar housing market. Those folks are taking a bath on real estate just like the average Joe in the city. Detroiters were not the only people to see their house values decrease. Anybody who bought a house after 2006 is pretty much screwed. If you made a 20% down payment then your house value is close to your loan balance. If you maxed out and went FHA or got 100% financing then you're under water. This is all over the USA and not just in Detroit.

[GOAT]

Danny what about the Centaurians? Can they get financing?

[Danny]

Danny what about the Centaurians? Can they get financing?

You just have to wait and see about 100 years in the future.

[agirlintheD]

gnome...spot on.

[Alex Martin]

Detroit was planned to fail. If you're poor, where else can you live? Somebody gonna say that the Detroit City Council watched businesses move out or shut down decade after decade and just kinda missed it? Uh, uh. There was a plan to do all this.

City Council in the 1970s - Tax revenues are going down. It gets worse in the '80s and '90s. Wake up folks.

My old house got looted plenty of times.

[Danny]

Having the poor and low-income folks running the Detroit is a social experiment that is destined to fail. Having regionalizational corporate folks running Detroit is a conservative experiment destined to win and conquer the low-income and slay the poor.

[Hermod]

Having the poor and low-income folks running the Detroit is a social experiment that is destined to fail. Having regionalizational corporate folks running Detroit is a conservative experiment destined to win and conquer the low-income and slay the poor.

regionalizational: Now there is a classic example of a word butchered by "governmentese".

"conquer the low-income"??????

"slay the poor"???????

to what end??

If the corporate folks wanted to empty out the city, it would have been far cheaper to, in 1970, give every one they wanted to get rid of a check for $20,000 and a plane ticket to Los Angeles rather than destroy the city and then rebuild it.

.

[Danny]

regionalizational: Now there is a classic example of a word butchered by "governmentese".

"conquer the low-income"??????

"slay the poor"???????

to what end??

If the corporate folks wanted to empty out the city, it would have been far cheaper to, in 1970, give every one they wanted to get rid of a check for $20,000 and a plane ticket to Los Angeles rather than destroy the city and then rebuild it.

.

In New York City in the early 1970s they city was broke, more blocks in slum ghettos like Harlem and the Bronx are turning into instant brownfields and Times Square was turning into Porn Square. Then Donald Trump have an ideal. Tell his unscrupolous real estate and Wall Street investors to develop a international World Trade Center community, slum clear old blocks and develop more condos further uptown, and eradicate all the porn burlesque theatres in Times Square. The plan worked and New York is back on regionalizational track. Gentrification in N.Y.C. has spread faster in the mid 1990s to the present day in most once slum areas in Harlem and Bronx. Most blocks are ethnically diverse then ever. This plan should have done in Detroit back in the 1970s, but it was too much 'BLACK POWER' in the ghettos to city politics to have regionalization. Whites were scared that a first black Detroit Mayor named Coleman Young took power so more left and so they their businesses. Today thanks to Dennis Archer's tax breaks, regionalization in Detroit is on a slow growth and Dave Bing will finish the job once the corporate banks and mortage companies slum clear and downsize fewer Detroit homes to prevent blacks and other folks from re-buying their once communities and re-develop pre-suburbanesque neighborhoods.

[maxx]

Danny:
Scrupulous means honest or principled. I think you mean unscrupulous in the context you're using.

And what would a pre-suburbanesque neighborhood be? A farm?

[Hermod]

Danny:
Scrupulous means honest or principled. I think you mean unscrupulous in the context you're using.

And what would a pre-suburbanesque neighborhood be? A farm?

Maybe like Lexington, Kentucky with white rail fences and horses?

Mr. Obama! When do I get my pony?

[English]

Having the poor and low-income folks running the Detroit is a social experiment that is destined to fail. Having regionalizational corporate folks running Detroit is a conservative experiment destined to win and conquer the low-income and slay the poor.

Danny, you almost ruined my laptop keyboard! Thanks so much for the laugh -- I needed it!

On a more serious note, the looting has come as entire blocks and neighborhoods have emptied out. I didn't grow up in the best area of the city, but there was no wholesale looting because the block was at 100% occupancy until the early 2000s... and there were usually people around all day, every day. Retirees, etc.

[Danny]

Danny:

And what would a pre-suburbanesque neighborhood be? A farm?

It would be filled with new McMansions, condos and super ranches. We all seen it happen on some Detroit ghettohoods like on E. Jefferson Ave. and St. Jean Rd. Herman Gardens, Rose Parks St. north of W. Grand Blvd. Dickerson and Freud St. Just use Google Maps and scan the area.

[Danny]

Danny, you almost ruined my laptop keyboard! Thanks so much for the laugh -- I needed it!

On a more serious note, the looting has come as entire blocks and neighborhoods have emptied out. I didn't grow up in the best area of the city, but there was no wholesale looting because the block was at 100% occupancy until the early 2000s... and there were usually people around all day, every day. Retirees, etc.

Banks and mortage companies are joining the looting and downsizing band wagon until they get some money off the brownfield lots.