By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - So Detroit is now Bankrupt...

Pipedream24 said:

No, this was not avoidable unless you could go back in a time machine and stop the riots back in the 1960's. it was the beginning of the end for Detroit. After the riots,the slow migration of all the decent hardworking citizens began. At its peak, Detroit had over 2 million people living in it around 1960...now it's down to around 800,000 with over 20% unemployment. My Grandparents used to tell me how beautiful the city was when they grew up...but when I was a kid growing up in the 80's, I couldn't believe them. The city was already a warzone. Buildings boarded up everywhere, drug houses all over the place, and nasty hookers littering the blocks. My grandparents were the only Caucasian people living on their street and they held out as long as they could. They bought there house in the late 40's and finally got forced out of their  house when bullets sprayed through their walls from the crack house next door. That was around 1990.

If you have never been there, Detroit is a massive city when it comes to the amount of area it covers. When you lose that many tax paying people and have to provide services to same amount of area cost will get out of control. Tack on 40 years of Coleman Young and Kwame Kiltzpatrick running the city and you have a recipe for disaster. Those two may have been the most corrupt mayors in the countries history and the people of Detroit just kept reelecting them...not  that they were helping the city, but because they were democrats and the color of their skin. Not that it really mattered. When you have a police force that was severely underpaid, a less than 50% high school graduation rate, and empty buildings everywhere, you have a recipe for disaster. It's a real shame because you have a real nice area developing around Greektown and the stadiums downtown. But if you stray a couple blocks watch out.

People have thrown out ideas about demolishing half the city that is abandoned and turn it into farmland. You could reduce the cities service bill, create jobs, and get rid of the abandoned parts of town all in one shot. But it was shot shot down instantly by the corrupt government and all the lazy welfare recipients that might actually have to work for a living.

As far as the auto industry goes, most of the factories have been in the suburbs for quite some time. So the recent downturn in the U.S. auto industry only had a minimal effect on Detroit's tax revenue. But as some of the above posters mentioned, you can blame that on the unions. When you have janitors making over $20 an hour, getting time and a half and double time on the weekends, you have a serious problem. The plants shut down for a month and all the workers still get 70% of their pay for the month....seriously??? And they still have all their vacation and sick days. Paying huge bonuses for years to people already earning 50k a year working the line with a high school education and they expected the industry to survive. I hope the UAW is happy. They destroyed the pride of Michigan. 

Detroit will not comeback in my lifetime. And unfortunately this is going to start happening more across the country. Oakland, California will be the next big city to file bankruptcy. It's another city that has been blue for 50 years and is in the same situation as Detroit. 

And what's even scarier is that our Federal Government is running the entire country the same way these cities have been run. How much longer can the Fed keep printing money before the U.S dollar is worthless. The whole system is broken. Things need to go back to the way our founding father's laid out. Have the Federal government deal with military and foreign concerns and let the states run themselves. Stop regulating, policing, and spying on your own citizens. But I fear it's too late and whether we like it or not we are no longer a democracy and are crossing the line into a solicialistic state run by corporations.

End Rant and sorry for bouncing around on my train of thoughts.

Great read.



Around the Network
killerzX said:
thats what 50 years of total democrat and union control (but i repeat myself) will do to a city.


or when the people of the state vote against city  managers only to let rethugs do what they do best in the middle of the night to re-instate them.  all major cities have the same problem.  most of the money earned is in the big cities but the people that earn the most live outside of the city.  the people that live in the city shop at malls in the suburbs.  all of this leads to lower tax revenue for the city.  what happens when the revenues are lowered? they raise taxes.   what happens when taxes are raised? more people move out, property values decrease and the cycle starts over again.  it's common sense not based on conservative ignorance



I work as a city manager, so I find this topic especially interesting. I don't have an opinion on it yet though, so I want to learn a bit more on Detroit's situation and come back to it.

People blaming the UAW are a bit off though. German auto workers are actually much better compensated than American ones. American car companies have just always been very inefficient and slow to adapt. Poorly designed vehicles, poor quality and ridiculous levels of redundancy (To think that Chrysler's new Pentastar engine replaced something like 6 or 8 crappy, different V6's used throughout their company line!!?!?!).

Strong Unions (or well-compensated non-union workers) are very good for the overall economy by re-distributing wealth and creating balance. The major problem in today's western economy is that for decades manufacturing has been moving to Asia. You can't constantly be funneling money from your country into another for all of your manufactured goods and expect it not to eventually destroy your economy. Western countries desperately need to tariff countries where manufacturing workers are not well compensated in order to create a fair global economy. The problem is not that workers in the US (or elsewhere) are too well paid, but that workers in other countries are not paid well enough. Executives for large corporations have managed to convince many in the public that US workers are spoiled as an excuse to use near-slave labour in other countries. US voters should be demanding trade tariffs so that UAW members are not looked at as getting too much, but rather so that other workers in other manufacturing sectors can also be making as much.



killerzX said:
the2real4mafol said:
Marks said:
the2real4mafol said:

The other day, it was announced that Detroit was filing for bankruptcy, the largest American city, if not the largest city in the world to do so. I find it quite depressing really, that once a great city has been allowed to rot like this. I shouldn't be suprised though, as cars was it's heart, it's what made Detroit. Once manufacturing of cars left for Asia in the 80's and 90's, the city sort of died i guess but to think in all this time it hasn't really been re-invented yet. It has been allowed to wallow in the past. Just one of the great flaws of capitalism i guess, as profit was put first and so companies would rather exploit Asian workers rather than employ people in their home country. And to think this could of happened in many cities around the world if they weren't reinvented. The Eastern parts of London come to mind for me, that area became a dump in the 80's but does ok now because of the financial district and the investment from the 2012 olympics. 

But anyway, let's discuss this. 

1. Was this avoidable?

2. How can Detroit become prosperous again? if possible

3. Will we ever learn from the mistakes of Detroit? Where most of the city's economy was based off making cars and nothing else. 


It's the UAW's fault plain and simple for ruining the auto industry. When will people learn that union's have outlived their usefulenes and are now doing more harm than good? At the turn of the century they were useful for getting safe working conditions, overtime pay, etc. but now they just demand outrageous wages, all the time off you could want, and protect unproductive workers from being canned. 

Disband the UAW (U Aren't Working) and you will see jobs staying in America instead of going to Mexico. Or at the very least make Michigan a Right to Work state and let workers choose to leave the union but keep their job. I'm sure many workers will find conditions the same, and will enjoy not having part of their salary go to Union dues. 

Oh so whenever a industry fails, always gotta blame someone like the unions have you? You don't realise how useful trade unions are do you? Without them, we would still be working 16 hours a day for a few dollars a day. The work would be deadly due to a a lack of safety regulations. There would be child labour. The workplace would be filthy. The factories would be far more polluting. You could just go to a Chinese or Indian factory and you would see what your work would be like without the imput of trade unions all because the companies are just greedy. I'm sure they could get there products made in a developed country and still make money.

Without trade unions, i'm sure companies would go back to their exploitative ways. Without no one pushing for the worker to get the best deal, wages would remain flat despite inflation. They would get away without allowing people to have holidays off every now and then or have sick pay. The way i see it why should the lazy executive get millions and yet the hard working people who make the products, the workers get barely enough to live on? 

And another thing, if American car companies want to be popular again, they need to make fuel efficient cars now. 

thats an utter ridiculous lie, and you know it.

8 hr work days with above minimum wage was implemented without unions. (see: henry ford)

and if a company decides it wants to implement a 16 hr work week and pays its employees a couple bucks, i say let them. and let see how many people decide to work for them, and how long they stay in business with those kinds of business practices.

you really dont have any concept of reality when it comes to how markets and businesses operate, do you?

 

 

"The way i see it why should the lazy executive get millions and yet the hard working people who make the products, the workers get barely enough to live on?"

 seriously or you guys trying to be parodies of communists? is this some kind of joke. ceo's dont work? only their employees are hard working? I would like to see a company be run without a ceo, or with one of those "hard working people" be the ceo, and see how long the company stays solvent.

and those poor working, forced into slave labor, getting paid pennies a day, being abused by their bloodsucking bosses. dont make me laugh


Unions do tons of overpay and uncessary work. They sound good but when you look into they don't. Besides Unions are the reason why Hostess and USPS.



Started gaming on PS3 3/6/14 :)

Pipedream24 said:

And what's even scarier is that our Federal Government is running the entire country the same way these cities have been run. How much longer can the Fed keep printing money before the U.S dollar is worthless. The whole system is broken. Things need to go back to the way our founding father's laid out. Have the Federal government deal with military and foreign concerns and let the states run themselves. Stop regulating, policing, and spying on your own citizens. But I fear it's too late and whether we like it or not we are no longer a democracy and are crossing the line into a solicialistic state run by corporations.

End Rant and sorry for bouncing around on my train of thoughts.

To address this last point, money holds its integrity both in confidence as a store of value and as a medium of exchange. The breadth to which the US dollar is used, worldwide, means that our government has a much longer leash in regards to money-printing, as the base of demand for the US dollar, for mere everyday use and not as a moneymaking arbitrage tool, is vast.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
PATRIOT7GAMING said:
killerzX said:

thats an utter ridiculous lie, and you know it.

8 hr work days with above minimum wage was implemented without unions. (see: henry ford)

and if a company decides it wants to implement a 16 hr work week and pays its employees a couple bucks, i say let them. and let see how many people decide to work for them, and how long they stay in business with those kinds of business practices.

you really dont have any concept of reality when it comes to how markets and businesses operate, do you?

 

 

"The way i see it why should the lazy executive get millions and yet the hard working people who make the products, the workers get barely enough to live on?"

 seriously or you guys trying to be parodies of communists? is this some kind of joke. ceo's dont work? only their employees are hard working? I would like to see a company be run without a ceo, or with one of those "hard working people" be the ceo, and see how long the company stays solvent.

and those poor working, forced into slave labor, getting paid pennies a day, being abused by their bloodsucking bosses. dont make me laugh


Unions do tons of overpay and uncessary work. They sound good but when you look into they don't. Besides Unions are the reason why Hostess and USPS.

Hostess negotiated with their union in bad faith. They once told the workers to dodge a pay raise for the good of the company as a whole (to avoid bankruptcy!) the workers did so, the first time. Trouble was, Hostess took those savings and spent them on Executive Pay and the company continued to nosedive. So the *second* time Hostess came around and told the Union "pay cut or we go broke." The Union rightfully said "screw you."

On the part of the US Postal Service, aside from their collapsing revenue base (direct bulk mailing is what keeps them afloat now), the thing really crippling them is their "you must pre-fund your pensions for 75 years" thing, a law which was passed, by Republicans, specifically to cripple the USPS.

There are examples of greedy unions out there, but Hostess and USPS are both examples of right-wing malice and/or incompetence.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:

Hostess negotiated with their union in bad faith. They once told the workers to dodge a pay raise for the good of the company as a whole (to avoid bankruptcy!) the workers did so, the first time. Trouble was, Hostess took those savings and spent them on Executive Pay and the company continued to nosedive. So the *second* time Hostess came around and told the Union "pay cut or we go broke." The Union rightfully said "screw you."

On the part of the US Postal Service, aside from their collapsing revenue base (direct bulk mailing is what keeps them afloat now), the thing really crippling them is their "you must pre-fund your pensions for 75 years" thing, a law which was passed, by Republicans, specifically to cripple the USPS.

There are examples of greedy unions out there, but Hostess and USPS are both examples of right-wing malice and/or incompetence.

Yaknow, I just thought USPS was doing badly because they charge much less for the same service as any other carrier.

Boy was I wrong. In fact, it appears as if Congress is readressing this issue shortly. Man...having to pay 5.5B a year rather than pay what it actually owes. wtf? I'm with Khan on this. Stephen Lynch tried to fix this more than 2 years ago, and FL and CA republicans instead proposed that the usps workers fix it themselves, and said they would work against REPAYING 80B in overpaid pensions. 80B is a lot of fucking money.



CDiablo said:
KylieDog said:
the2real4mafol said:

2. How can Detroit become prosperous again? if possible

 


I give you...



Delta City!

Thats a stupid idea. I cant imagine all the scum being cleaned up by the police force they have out there. Half the populus are heavily armed gangsters and the other half are nuke heads. If you can name one cop or one type of cop that can clean up the city ill paypal you $100.


Robocop

 

No need to give me the 100 Dollar though please donate the money to http://www.cancerresearch.org/giving-to-cri/ways-to-give and post the receipt later here.



Mr Khan said:
Marks said:
the2real4mafol said:
 

Oh so whenever a industry fails, always gotta blame someone like the unions have you? You don't realise how useful trade unions are do you? Without them, we would still be working 16 hours a day for a few dollars a day. The work would be deadly due to a a lack of safety regulations. There would be child labour. The workplace would be filthy. The factories would be far more polluting. You could just go to a Chinese or Indian factory and you would see what your work would be like without the imput of trade unions all because the companies are just greedy. I'm sure they could get there products made in a developed country and still make money.

Without trade unions, i'm sure companies would go back to their exploitative ways. Without no one pushing for the worker to get the best deal, wages would remain flat despite inflation. They would get away without allowing people to have holidays off every now and then or have sick pay. The way i see it why should the lazy executive get millions and yet the hard working people who make the products, the workers get barely enough to live on? 

And another thing, if American car companies want to be popular again, they need to make fuel efficient cars now. 


Really, you think if unions disappeared today that all of a sudden people would be forced to work 16 hours a day with no overtime pay, no safety equipment, and in filthy environments? 

No, the free market (which includes the employee/labour market) would force companies to improve conditions or else have their workers quit and work for the competition. If the factory across the street has high tech safety equipment and offers better pay, you can either match it or see your staff flock out like bats out of hell. The free market works as well, if not better, than goverment in all instances. 

Workers quit and go where? Labor is a buyer's market, inherently, and all companies would push wages down as low as they felt they could for the job to still be "worth it" (and not in terms of what the job is fairly worth, but that you can hit a point where the pay is so low that people would just rather go on welfare)

If that were actually true, then why are only 6% of employees paid minimum wage? Oh, because labor competition is what actually sets wages.

Some interesting stats on this...

  • Only about 6% of the workforce actually makes at or below minimum wage at any given time
  • The vast majority of these are young people and/or people with very little education or in part time positions
  • The industry with the highest number of people making these low hourly wages is the foodservice industry, where tips make up the difference, leading to actual incomes generally above minimum wage. If you take these out (since they make more than minimum wage when you include tips), the above figure would drop much lower.
  • Almost nobody STAYS at minimum wage, unless in a tip-based position, but they make more than the statistic suggests anyway

The fact is, as long as you get a halfway decent education, there's absolutely no way you should be stuck in a minimum wage position. Hell, I worked at a fast food restaurant while in high school and was only at minimum wage for 3 months there! If companies could really 'push down' wages without a minimum wage as you (wrongly) suggest, they should be able to 'push down' wages to the minimum wage with one in place, but that's not the case. Why do the vast, overwhelming majority of workers (in both union and non-union positions) make above the minimum wage? There's no law stating they have to pay their employees what they do.. It's because the market has set reasonable value on those jobs, not a government regulation.

That's a fact, Jack!

EDIT: If employers really had the power to just go as low as they wanted, why is the average hourly earnings in the US about $24? http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm . The current minimum wage has almost zero impact on real hourly rates.



This is why the idea that companies could somehow drop wages as described by some here is patently wrong. Those who think this way fail to understand what competition is and how the cause and effect plays out in this scenario. They act as if people are helpless saps who can't think for themselves, so the benevolent government must step in to make the big, bad businesses not trample the poor, helpless, mindless masses underfoot. In reality...

First, we need to set up some parameters...

  • Smart business people recognize the fact that they need good, hard-working employees to be successful
  • Stupid business people mistreat or underpay employees, failing to recognize cause and effect for this action
  • Smart employees are generally good, hard-working employees, because they realize that good employees get paid more
  • Smart employees are smart enough to look for another job or work on developing other skills if they are underpaid or mistreated

Based on these parameters...

  • Smart employers will offer competitive pay in order to keep good/smart employees, therefore maintaining a quality business
  • Stupid business owners will underpay employees
  • Smart employees leave stupid employer for smart employer and better pay
  • Smart business owner hires smart, hard-working employees to gain a competitive edge
  • Stupid and/or lazy employees stay with stupid business owner
  • Stupid business owner's business fails due to poor service
  • Smart business owner's business prospors, hires more employees at reasonable rate
  • The cycle continues