Quote Originally Posted by mam2009 View Post
Someone can correct me FACTUALLY on this, but I believe that the State is both constitutionally & statutorily bound to give that revenue sharing money to Detroit as long as that revenue is in the State's coffers which is the only reason why any bondholders are willing to take the risk of lending us their money. Hopefully, an expert on municipal bonding can weigh in. I don't mean to split hairs. My point was just that this isnt Detroit welfare or some special Detroit-only favor. Since the Govermor didn't think it wise to GIVE Detroit any direct financial assistance, the State encouraged the City to go to the bond market AGAIN to BORROW ITS WAY OUT OF DEBT. I thought that's what got us here in the first place, Mr. Governor? Hmmm...
Wait, are you implying that the Governor is trying to sabotage the city by encouraging them to borrow more money? And that if he was really trying to help the city then they would just GIVE Detroit more money?

If so, it's like we're living on two different planets.