Jump to content


The largest municipal bankruptcy in US history.


  • Please log in to reply
196 replies to this topic

#1 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:42 PM


Detroit files for bankruptcy, it is simply not competitive any more.

http://www.detroitne...|text|FRONTPAGE

#2 Bus Driver

Bus Driver

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,821 posts
  • Location:Just this side of insanity.

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:45 PM

Missed Rick's thread, did you?



#3 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:47 PM

Sad.

But I bet in 10 years we will be talking about the Detroit Renaissance! 

 

It just could not deal with the "free trade" and Commie China/Outsourcing threats. The die was cast in about 1980.....



#4 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:48 PM

Missed Rick's thread, did you?

Yes I did.

#5 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:51 PM

Sad.
But I bet in 10 years we will be talking about the Detroit Renaissance! 
 
It just could not deal with the "free trade" and Commie China/Outsourcing threats. The die was cast in about 1980.....

The auto industry in the south seems to be dealing with it. I hope you're right and after some restructuring Detroit will be back.

#6 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:16 PM

Detroit missed its first pension plan payment in 1950. This has nothing to do with the auto companies or China or any of that cragiricrap he loves to spout. Bad decisions, badly implemented, with bad luck thrown in, again and again and again. When you don't have enough cash flow that you have to borrow to make pension payments, you just dig the hole deeper and deeper. How much of the 18 billion is owed to lenders who loaned money to make pension plan payments?

#7 jetboy

jetboy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:40 PM

I'm trying to think of some reason Detroit would hold an advantage for drawing in new businesses and residents.  I really can't think of one.  For those who see a Renaissance in Detroit, what do you see driving it?



#8 plchacker

plchacker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts
  • Location:Helwestern AL

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:43 PM

Sad.

But I bet in 10 years we will be talking about the Detroit Renaissance

 

It just could not deal with the "free trade" and Commie China/Outsourcing threats. The die was cast in about 1980.....

I hope this is true.



#9 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 19 July 2013 - 02:13 AM

I'm trying to think of some reason Detroit would hold an advantage for drawing in new businesses and residents.  I really can't think of one.  For those who see a Renaissance in Detroit, what do you see driving it?

The New Economy of some sort.....

 

It won't be industrial, that's for sure. But people seem to like living in urban environments...

 

My birthplace, Philadelphia, was very much like Detroit from 1970-1990 or so. Over 1/4 of the population left town, etc.

Now they are all clamoring to move there (young people) and the whole place is booming. What are they doing? Everything! I know someone who designs fashion, others in remodeling and construction, others who are lawyers, etc.

 

Realistically, there is nothing that could have saved Detroit. Cars are largely built by robots now. Transport is so well coordinated that parts made anywhere in the world can be shipped in Just In Time to supply factories. 

 

As far as the south and cars - many, if not most, of those factories are foreign companies. They come here for the cheap labor and lack of worker protections. They don't have to, for instance, provide health care and pensions like elsewhere. Why wouldn't they want to milk America?



#10 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 03:48 PM

As far as the south and cars - many, if not most, of those factories are foreign companies. They come here for the cheap labor and lack of worker protections. They don't have to, for instance, provide health care and pensions like elsewhere. Why wouldn't they want to milk America?


The Asian and European vehicle factories in the South have employee health benefits, 401k plans and in some cases (like Toyota) the factories have the same unions blamed for Detroit's fall.

The big difference is that they don't have the monstrous overhead of pensions for workers and suits that were originally supposed to live until 70 years old and now push to 90 and beyond.

Detroit will recover, they're reinventing themselves. Remember when Pittsburgh was nearly dead? Regional economic are cyclical, the Sunbelt is having its day now. North Dakota is having its day now too. When I was a kid, houses in North Dakota were being liquidated by HUD for a few hundred dollars each.

#11 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,106 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 19 July 2013 - 04:10 PM

Matt Millen for Mayor!



#12 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 19 July 2013 - 07:46 PM

As far as the south and cars - many, if not most, of those factories are foreign companies. They come here for the cheap labor and lack of worker protections. They don't have to, for instance, provide health care and pensions like elsewhere. Why wouldn't they want to milk America?


The Asian and European vehicle factories in the South have employee health benefits, 401k plans and in some cases (like Toyota) the factories have the same unions blamed for Detroit's fall.

 

410K's are part of the same tendency - make the workers, out of lower salaries, fund their own benefits.

 

VW was given ONE BILLION dollars in incentives and tax breaks for their TN plant. Workers may have health care when they are there (to some degree) but they probably don't get covered after they are laid off - as 500 of them just were in May.

 

Fact is, a worker in America costs much less than one in Germany, where you actually have to give good vacation, health care, pension and all those other troubling benefits.

 

"In 2010, Germany produced more than 5.5 million automobiles; the U.S produced 2.7 million. At the same time, the average auto worker in Germany made $67.14 per hour in salary in benefits; the average one in the U.S. made $33.77 per hour."



#13 plchacker

plchacker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts
  • Location:Helwestern AL

Posted 19 July 2013 - 08:15 PM

I'm trying to think of some reason Detroit would hold an advantage for drawing in new businesses and residents.  I really can't think of one.  For those who see a Renaissance in Detroit, what do you see driving it?

The New Economy of some sort.....

 

It won't be industrial, that's for sure. But people seem to like living in urban environments...

 

My birthplace, Philadelphia, was very much like Detroit from 1970-1990 or so. Over 1/4 of the population left town, etc.

Now they are all clamoring to move there (young people) and the whole place is booming. What are they doing? Everything! I know someone who designs fashion, others in remodeling and construction, others who are lawyers, etc.

 

Realistically, there is nothing that could have saved Detroit. Cars are largely built by robots now. Transport is so well coordinated that parts made anywhere in the world can be shipped in Just In Time to supply factories. 

 

As far as the south and cars - many, if not most, of those factories are foreign companies. They come here for the cheap labor and lack of worker protections. They don't have to, for instance, provide health care and pensions like elsewhere. Why wouldn't they want to milk America?

Craig, you simply misunderstand the auto industry and apparently the South. 

 

Lets start with the robot myth.  Robots are used in automotive production, no doubt, however, most of the assembly line is still manned by people.  Robots handle the welding, painting and in certain situations (like installing the dash board) some assembly.  But if you look at a modern assembly line you would be shocked at the number of human beings running around putting cars together.

 

Second Most of the industry in the south is foreign - somewhat true, but there are GM plants in the Southeast. 

 

Third, Workers in the South are not protected (union?) and do not get healthcare etc.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Most of the mills I worked in are union mills. We are very familiar with the IBEW, US Steel workers, and many others.  The auto manufacturers provide excellent health care, 401K, and a myriad of other benefits. I don't know exactly what type of garbage you have been fed, or from who, but while we work for a bit less, our cost of living is dramatically less as well.  The quality of life is excellent.  Land is less expensive, taxes are lower, power and other utilities are cheaper, insurance is in most cases lower.  The list goes on.  That said, there are some situations where small mills take advantage of unskilled labor.  The average mill electrician makes better than $30/hr.  I will leave the Union vs Non-Union for another thread but you have been misinformed or simply choose to believe falsehoods about Southern Labor.

 

As for Detroit, the city was mismanaged.  Most of my father's family left Detroit well before the 1990's.  I have good friends there.  The auto industry suffered from mismanagement and over zealous union hacks, but while mismanagement brought both the city and the industry down, they were separate entities. 



#14 silent bob

silent bob

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,398 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted 19 July 2013 - 08:17 PM

Germany produced Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, VW, Etc....

 

 

Do you compare these to this?:

 

 

pontiac-aztek-yellow.jpg

 

 

Just a little difference.  When a German auto worker forgets a lug nut, he gets fired.  When a Detriot auto worker forgets a lug nut, he gets a bonus for saving $0.37!



#15 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 19 July 2013 - 08:44 PM

Third, Workers in the South are not protected (union?) and do not get healthcare etc.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Most of the mills I worked in are union mills. We are very familiar with the IBEW, US Steel workers, and many others.  The auto manufacturers provide excellent health care, 401K, and a myriad of other benefits. I don't know exactly what type of garbage you have been fed, or from who, but while we work for a bit less, our cost of living is dramatically less as well.  The quality of life is excellent.  Land is less expensive, taxes are lower, power and other utilities are cheaper, insurance is in most cases lower.  The list goes on.  That said, there are some situations where small mills take advantage of unskilled labor.  The average mill electrician makes better than $30/hr.  I will leave the Union vs Non-Union for another thread but you have been misinformed or simply choose to believe falsehoods about Southern Labor.

 

As for Detroit, the city was mismanaged.  Most of my father's family left Detroit well before the 1990's.  I have good friends there.  The auto industry suffered from mismanagement and over zealous union hacks, but while mismanagement brought both the city and the industry down, they were separate entities. 

 

They don't get health care when they are fired. The proof is in the pudding and that factory received a free BILLION dollars from the taxpayer and pays the workers 1/2 that of Germany. That's a BIG difference, my friend, and no amount of "new math" can prove that a worker gets the same life for 1/2 the price. 

 

Maybe you could compare:

Family leave

sick time

vacation (paid)

job security

Actual pension

health care upon terminations and retirement

 

to the German model and get back to us. 

 

My claim is simply that they come here because the workers cost them 1/2 the price and the taxpayers and worse lifestyles of the workers make up the difference. That's the difference between $30 and $60 an hour - one pays the entire life cycle cost and the other pays while you are young and strong and healthy and then dumps you. 

 

Please - let me know how well those 500 workers just laid off do compared to German workers. I don't even have to look it up to assume that they fare much worse off. And that's all my point is. They move the plants here because of the gift of cheap Labor and taxpayer incentives.

 

Do you really claim otherwise? Sure, they also get other benefits such as being closer to the market and being able to arbitrage the currencies, etc. - but the main driver is a willing workforce that will work for less and pols which will give them taxpayer money.

 

As far as robotics, you certainly are familiar that there used to be a person with a spot welder to do each of a couple welds? Now there is this. No one can watch it and deny that vast numbers of workers have been excused....

 

Not only have robots vastly reduced the man-hours required to build (the same) car, but they also build a much better car which then lasts much longer. Back of the envelope calcs might go like this.....

 

Average age and milage of cars from the heyday of Detroit (1960) to today has doubled....

Robotics has replaced 50% of all workers required to build the same car.

 

Taking that as a possibility, that would mean - even without the big foreign brands having taken over - that 1/4 the number of workers would be needed to manufacturer cars. Whatever the real numbers are, I posit that it is certainly enough to destroy the economy which was built on auto manufacturing. Add in the foreign makes and you have a complete rout. 



#16 Rum Runner

Rum Runner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,131 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 08:55 PM

Detroit files for bankruptcy, it is simply not competitive any more.

http://www.detroitne...|text|FRONTPAGE

 

This is just the beginning.  Who is next?  Cleveland?  Chicago?  Buffalo?



#17 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:47 PM

Cracrapping on about the auto industry is like pissing to windward. You want to really begin to understand Detroit's problems today, you need to first understand the blockbusting that took place from the end of WW2 until the race riots of 1967, when whites didn't need deceptive real estate practices anymore to sell low and get the hell out to the suburbs.

#18 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 11:43 PM


As far as the south and cars - many, if not most, of those factories are foreign companies. They come here for the cheap labor and lack of worker protections. They don't have to, for instance, provide health care and pensions like elsewhere. Why wouldn't they want to milk America?

The Asian and European vehicle factories in the South have employee health benefits, 401k plans and in some cases (like Toyota) the factories have the same unions blamed for Detroit's fall.
 
410K's are part of the same tendency - make the workers, out of lower salaries, fund their own benefits.
 
VW was given ONE BILLION dollars in incentives and tax breaks for their TN plant. Workers may have health care when they are there (to some degree) but they probably don't get covered after they are laid off - as 500 of them just were in May.
 
Fact is, a worker in America costs much less than one in Germany, where you actually have to give good vacation, health care, pension and all those other troubling benefits.
 
"In 2010, Germany produced more than 5.5 million automobiles; the U.S produced 2.7 million. At the same time, the average auto worker in Germany made $67.14 per hour in salary in benefits; the average one in the U.S. made $33.77 per hour."

Ah, I misunderstood you. I assumed you meant benefits compared to the old system. But definitely, it's cheaper to make stuff here than in Germany and Japan, but I'm not sure about Italy and Korea.

#19 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 11:48 PM


I'm trying to think of some reason Detroit would hold an advantage for drawing in new businesses and residents.  I really can't think of one.  For those who see a Renaissance in Detroit, what do you see driving it?

The New Economy of some sort.....
 
It won't be industrial, that's for sure. But people seem to like living in urban environments...
 
My birthplace, Philadelphia, was very much like Detroit from 1970-1990 or so. Over 1/4 of the population left town, etc.
Now they are all clamoring to move there (young people) and the whole place is booming. What are they doing? Everything! I know someone who designs fashion, others in remodeling and construction, others who are lawyers, etc.
 
Realistically, there is nothing that could have saved Detroit. Cars are largely built by robots now. Transport is so well coordinated that parts made anywhere in the world can be shipped in Just In Time to supply factories. 
 
As far as the south and cars - many, if not most, of those factories are foreign companies. They come here for the cheap labor and lack of worker protections. They don't have to, for instance, provide health care and pensions like elsewhere. Why wouldn't they want to milk America?
Craig, you simply misunderstand the auto industry and apparently the South. 
 
Lets start with the robot myth.  Robots are used in automotive production, no doubt, however, most of the assembly line is still manned by people.  Robots handle the welding, painting and in certain situations (like installing the dash board) some assembly.  But if you look at a modern assembly line you would be shocked at the number of human beings running around putting cars together.
 
Second Most of the industry in the south is foreign - somewhat true, but there are GM plants in the Southeast. 
 
Third, Workers in the South are not protected (union?) and do not get healthcare etc.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Most of the mills I worked in are union mills. We are very familiar with the IBEW, US Steel workers, and many others.  The auto manufacturers provide excellent health care, 401K, and a myriad of other benefits. I don't know exactly what type of garbage you have been fed, or from who, but while we work for a bit less, our cost of living is dramatically less as well.  The quality of life is excellent.  Land is less expensive, taxes are lower, power and other utilities are cheaper, insurance is in most cases lower.  The list goes on.  That said, there are some situations where small mills take advantage of unskilled labor.  The average mill electrician makes better than $30/hr.  I will leave the Union vs Non-Union for another thread but you have been misinformed or simply choose to believe falsehoods about Southern Labor.
 
As for Detroit, the city was mismanaged.  Most of my father's family left Detroit well before the 1990's.  I have good friends there.  The auto industry suffered from mismanagement and over zealous union hacks, but while mismanagement brought both the city and the industry down, they were separate entities. 

I thought he was comparing to the old way too. He was just comparing the costs down South to the costs in Europe. We can definitely manufacture here for less than Germany.

#20 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 19 July 2013 - 11:56 PM

Not too sure about you Gurlz, but I'd rather be found dead, naked and with a rainbow stuffed down my throat----rather than live in a fuking country where the ashtray-putter-in guy is making a six fig salary.

 

That's just frickin insane....



#21 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:10 AM

In germany, the ash-tray guy wears white gloves and a white coverall, has apprenticed for 6 years before he can start and goes hiking on Friday afternoon along with millions of other Germans...after their short work day!



#22 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:30 AM

Which is why I would never buy a new German built car.

 

Ever.....



#23 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:08 AM

I like my 2010 Passat. 

It's got 60K and only had one repair bill which was some kind of air valve on the manifold which started whistling. 

 

It was really the only nice comfortable sedan in it's price range with some sport feel to it. 

 

But Mercedes? They should just close that place down. I made the mistake of buying a new one in 1994.....blew a head gasket at 25K, was in the shop for something or other every month, etc. - I dumped that as soon as I could.



#24 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 11:47 AM

Mark Stein at his best…

 

“With bankruptcy temporarily struck down, we're told that "innovation hubs" and "enterprise zones" are the answer. Seriously? In my book "After America," I observe that the physical decay of Detroit – the vacant and derelict lots for block after block after block – is as nothing compared with the decay of the city's human capital. Forty-seven percent of adults are functionally illiterate, which is about the same rate as in the Central African Republic, which at least has the excuse that it was ruled throughout the Seventies by a cannibal emperor. Why would any genuine innovator open a business in a Detroit "innovation hub"? Whom would you employ? The illiterates include a recent president of the School Board, Otis Mathis, which doesn't bode well for the potential workforce a decade hence.

 

Given their respective starting points, one has to conclude that Detroit's Democratic Party makes a far more comprehensive wrecking crew than Emperor Bokassa ever did. No bombs, no invasions, no civil war, just "liberal" "progressive" politics day in, day out. Americans sigh and say, "Oh, well, Detroit's an 'outlier.'" It's an outlier only in the sense that it happened here first. The same malign alliance between a corrupt political class, rapacious public sector unions and an ever more swollen army of welfare dependents has been adopted in the formally Golden State of California, and in large part by the Obama administration, whose priorities – "health" "care" "reform," "immigration" "reform" – are determined by the same elite/union/dependency axis. As one droll Tweeter put it, "If Obama had a city, it would look like Detroit."

 

http://www.ocregiste...bankruptcy.html



#25 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 20 July 2013 - 01:04 PM

So, Doggie, this is like blaming the woes of the entire south on the Republican party - you know, disease, obesity, shorter life spans, higher STD's, higher divorce rates, infant mortality off the charts, etc.

 

Could you ask your famed writer to comment on that...or is that an exception? Why do the states with "liberal democratic leadership" such as most of New England, CA, etc. lead the country in higher education and "smart" jobs?

 

Tough one, eh?

 

I can't believe you fall for that BS. Typical republican drivel.....blaming the victims! Ask all the white folks in SC and NC what happened to the mills that were there. They were first moved from new england because southerners would work for less and in worse conditions. Then the CEO's discovered Mexico and Asia. Bye Bye old south.....



#26 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 01:43 PM

craigiri might have been "educated" in Detroit, but saying that is doing the Detroit school system a severe disservice.



#27 learningj24

learningj24

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,839 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 01:44 PM

It seems that the economic impact on the city budget of cutting pensions has been calculated but has anyone looked at the overall economic impact of the pension cuts?  What percentage of the pension payments go to those living in Detroit?  What will be the impact of reduced consumer spending by those pensioners on the local buisnesses?



#28 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 03:26 PM

So, Doggie, this is like blaming the woes of the entire south on the Republican party - you know, disease, obesity, shorter life spans, higher STD's, higher divorce rates, infant mortality off the charts, etc.

 

Could you ask your famed writer to comment on that...or is that an exception? Why do the states with "liberal democratic leadership" such as most of New England, CA, etc. lead the country in higher education and "smart" jobs?

 

Tough one, eh?

 

I can't believe you fall for that BS. Typical republican drivel.....blaming the victims! Ask all the white folks in SC and NC what happened to the mills that were there. They were first moved from new england because southerners would work for less and in worse conditions. Then the CEO's discovered Mexico and Asia. Bye Bye old south.....

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.



#29 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 20 July 2013 - 06:46 PM

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.

It must be so nice to start with conclusions and then figure out how to make everything fit them.....

 

Personally, I think this happened because they elected a GOP Governor? Coincidence?

(of course, the above is in jest)....

 

Detroit failed for a lot of reasons and the stupidity of some poor people is not one of them. That is a RESULT of the failure, not a cause of it. If you want to get at the root of the problems, consider these trends, actions and lack of such.....

 

1. The executives of the Big Three built some of the biggest pieces on shit on the earth and put profits above quality. They refused to plan for the future or lead us into it.

2. Our national policy, starting with Ronald Reagan and continuing through the present day, has favored a LACK OF industrial policy and actually rewarded corporations for outsourcing. 

3. The same executives made stupid deals with politicians, unions and their own workers - all promises which could not be kept due to the shitty cars and other decisions they made.

4. Robotics and increased quality cut the number of workers required per "car/family/year/mileage" by as much as 75%

5. Economies of scale as well as the higher intelligence of Koreans, Japanese and Chinese managers and planners allowed them to enter the market with cars and parts.

6. The US Gubment made certain to allow "unfree trade"- basically a one-way street, where everyone could sell to us, but we had little protection or right to sell to them (at least when it came to cars).

7. Many (most?) large American cities have gone through a destruction and rebirth (remember "Escape from New York"?) - and now it's Detroit's turn. The future will not be like the past.....

 

So which of these do you want to discuss? Or are they not as exciting as "The Mayor was a crook"?



#30 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 08:39 PM

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.

It must be so nice to start with conclusions and then figure out how to make everything fit them.....

 

Personally, I think this happened because they elected a GOP Governor? Coincidence?

(of course, the above is in jest)....

 

Detroit failed for a lot of reasons and the stupidity of some poor people is not one of them. That is a RESULT of the failure, not a cause of it. If you want to get at the root of the problems, consider these trends, actions and lack of such.....

 

1. The executives of the Big Three built some of the biggest pieces on shit on the earth and put profits above quality. They refused to plan for the future or lead us into it.

2. Our national policy, starting with Ronald Reagan and continuing through the present day, has favored a LACK OF industrial policy and actually rewarded corporations for outsourcing. 

3. The same executives made stupid deals with politicians, unions and their own workers - all promises which could not be kept due to the shitty cars and other decisions they made.

4. Robotics and increased quality cut the number of workers required per "car/family/year/mileage" by as much as 75%

5. Economies of scale as well as the higher intelligence of Koreans, Japanese and Chinese managers and planners allowed them to enter the market with cars and parts.

6. The US Gubment made certain to allow "unfree trade"- basically a one-way street, where everyone could sell to us, but we had little protection or right to sell to them (at least when it came to cars).

7. Many (most?) large American cities have gone through a destruction and rebirth (remember "Escape from New York"?) - and now it's Detroit's turn. The future will not be like the past.....

 

So which of these do you want to discuss? Or are they not as exciting as "The Mayor was a crook"?

The big nut for Detroit is unfunded legacy costs. Public sector unions negotiated sweetheart deals with politicians they helped get elected and the tax payer didn’t have a seat at the table. In the end the tax payers moved on and Detroit lost 2/3 of its population. Corruption also contributed, who else does a functional illiterate become superintendant of schools.



#31 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 08:50 PM

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.

It must be so nice to start with conclusions and then figure out how to make everything fit them.....

 

Personally, I think this happened because they elected a GOP Governor? Coincidence?

(of course, the above is in jest)....

 

Detroit failed for a lot of reasons and the stupidity of some poor people is not one of them. That is a RESULT of the failure, not a cause of it. If you want to get at the root of the problems, consider these trends, actions and lack of such.....

 

1. The executives of the Big Three built some of the biggest pieces on shit on the earth and put profits above quality. They refused to plan for the future or lead us into it.

2. Our national policy, starting with Ronald Reagan and continuing through the present day, has favored a LACK OF industrial policy and actually rewarded corporations for outsourcing. 

3. The same executives made stupid deals with politicians, unions and their own workers - all promises which could not be kept due to the shitty cars and other decisions they made.

4. Robotics and increased quality cut the number of workers required per "car/family/year/mileage" by as much as 75%

5. Economies of scale as well as the higher intelligence of Koreans, Japanese and Chinese managers and planners allowed them to enter the market with cars and parts.

6. The US Gubment made certain to allow "unfree trade"- basically a one-way street, where everyone could sell to us, but we had little protection or right to sell to them (at least when it came to cars).

7. Many (most?) large American cities have gone through a destruction and rebirth (remember "Escape from New York"?) - and now it's Detroit's turn. The future will not be like the past.....

 

So which of these do you want to discuss? Or are they not as exciting as "The Mayor was a crook"?

 

What does that have to do with unfunded liabilities of the city?



#32 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 01:55 AM

So, Doggie, this is like blaming the woes of the entire south on the Republican party - you know, disease, obesity, shorter life spans, higher STD's, higher divorce rates, infant mortality off the charts, etc.

 

Could you ask your famed writer to comment on that...or is that an exception? Why do the states with "liberal democratic leadership" such as most of New England, CA, etc. lead the country in higher education and "smart" jobs?

 

Tough one, eh?

 

I can't believe you fall for that BS. Typical republican drivel.....blaming the victims! Ask all the white folks in SC and NC what happened to the mills that were there. They were first moved from new england because southerners would work for less and in worse conditions. Then the CEO's discovered Mexico and Asia. Bye Bye old south.....

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.

 

 

This statement sort of shows your ignorance on the subject in my opinion. Either that or you know exactly what went wrong with the U.S. Auto industry and you wrote this just be a political troll.

 

The "makers" and "takers" were at fault in Detroit. The makers were interested in maximizing their return at the expense of long-term investment and customer satisfaction and the takers were interested in a diluted version of what the makers wanted. Over a decade the foreign car companies jumped on the opportunity presented by an out-of-touch Detroit and by the time they saw where the ship was headed they didn't have enough rudder to avoid the iceberg.

 

For instance, management knew that they needed to be responsive to customers rather than selling them blades for the razors, they knew by the early 1970s that the fashion of replacing cars every four years was dying fast, but they weren't set up to make much more than 5-year vehicles, things like zinc-coatings, wide-year replacement parts, and low-complexity designs required investment that would have required pay cuts in management that they weren't prepared to accept, and felt they didn't have to accept with the society of Ann Arbor doing as much to dictate the management policies of these companies than the response to customers. Similarly, the unions had the chance to use their bargaining positions to create worker-management boards, which would have helped the companies because the assembly-line workers, engineers and qc guys knew the process on a level that the suits didn't, they needed to be involved in the design and marketing of those vehicles and have a vote on the board through an ESOP. But just like management, they took the route to quick profits, low-vision, and instead just fought for a diluted version of what the suits fought, for better benefits/retirement and higher pay.

 

AMC did what they could to change the climate, but Ford and GM were in the rut, and they focused more on putting AMC out of business, rather than being responsive to Datsun and Honda, who were okay with seeing reduced profits from their contract supply chain and replacement parts in exchange for a higher quality product.

 

It's cute to reduce Detroit to some kind of lefty-vision gone wrong, but it doesn't really jibe with reality.



#33 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:00 AM

The big nut for Detroit is unfunded legacy costs. Public sector unions negotiated sweetheart deals with politicians they helped get elected and the tax payer didn’t have a seat at the table. In the end the tax payers moved on and Detroit lost 2/3 of its population. Corruption also contributed, who else does a functional illiterate become superintendant of schools.

 

 

Again, it's silly to suggest that the unions were doing anything that management didn't show them how to do first. These "tax-payers" that moved on were many of the same workers that made up that union. And it's wrong to suggest the union was anything more than a reflection of those worker's requests. They wanted the morsels because management wanted the cheese.



#34 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:01 AM

Which is why I would never buy a new German built car.

 

Ever.....

 

But you're hunky dory with buying German-designed firearms?



#35 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:12 AM

What does that have to do with unfunded liabilities of the city?

Gonna be hard to explain if you don't already understand the way economics work...

 

Basics are that all those things would be funded if the population increased as normal and the economy increased, etc.

 

It's only because the bottom fell out that the problems were magnified. NYC and Philly are not having the same problems - or at least they are solvable. San Francisco, that bastion of Liberal Democracy, seems pretty good even though they pay for sex change operations for their municipal employees. 

 

Why?

 

It's the same with any business. Build up a business to a certain size and then have it cut in 1/2 or less.....you'll usually go bankrupt also. So, yes, ALL those things are what caused the problems.



#36 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:23 AM

 

So, Doggie, this is like blaming the woes of the entire south on the Republican party - you know, disease, obesity, shorter life spans, higher STD's, higher divorce rates, infant mortality off the charts, etc.

 

Could you ask your famed writer to comment on that...or is that an exception? Why do the states with "liberal democratic leadership" such as most of New England, CA, etc. lead the country in higher education and "smart" jobs?

 

Tough one, eh?

 

I can't believe you fall for that BS. Typical republican drivel.....blaming the victims! Ask all the white folks in SC and NC what happened to the mills that were there. They were first moved from new england because southerners would work for less and in worse conditions. Then the CEO's discovered Mexico and Asia. Bye Bye old south.....

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.

 

 

This statement sort of shows your ignorance on the subject in my opinion. Either that or you know exactly what went wrong with the U.S. Auto industry and you wrote this just be a political troll.

 

The "makers" and "takers" were at fault in Detroit. The makers were interested in maximizing their return at the expense of long-term investment and customer satisfaction and the takers were interested in a diluted version of what the makers wanted. Over a decade the foreign car companies jumped on the opportunity presented by an out-of-touch Detroit and by the time they saw where the ship was headed they didn't have enough rudder to avoid the iceberg.

 

For instance, management knew that they needed to be responsive to customers rather than selling them blades for the razors, they knew by the early 1970s that the fashion of replacing cars every four years was dying fast, but they weren't set up to make much more than 5-year vehicles, things like zinc-coatings, wide-year replacement parts, and low-complexity designs required investment that would have required pay cuts in management that they weren't prepared to accept, and felt they didn't have to accept with the society of Ann Arbor doing as much to dictate the management policies of these companies than the response to customers. Similarly, the unions had the chance to use their bargaining positions to create worker-management boards, which would have helped the companies because the assembly-line workers, engineers and qc guys knew the process on a level that the suits didn't, they needed to be involved in the design and marketing of those vehicles and have a vote on the board through an ESOP. But just like management, they took the route to quick profits, low-vision, and instead just fought for a diluted version of what the suits fought, for better benefits/retirement and higher pay.

 

AMC did what they could to change the climate, but Ford and GM were in the rut, and they focused more on putting AMC out of business, rather than being responsive to Datsun and Honda, who were okay with seeing reduced profits from their contract supply chain and replacement parts in exchange for a higher quality product.

 

It's cute to reduce Detroit to some kind of lefty-vision gone wrong, but it doesn't really jibe with reality.

 

WTF does that have to do with the government spending more than it had coming in and making unrealistic promises?



#37 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:38 AM

We really should have two threads - one for those who cannot separate the word Detroit from the "American" car companies and one for those few who realize that Detroit is a city with horrible problems - a billion dollar budget and 770 million in revenues being the specific problem being addressed by the bankruptcy.

But, if the Democratic non-partisan judge has her way, the bankruptcy won't touch the under funded pensions and retiree benefits.

#38 mikeys clone no1

mikeys clone no1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,675 posts
  • Location:mikes left foot

Posted 21 July 2013 - 03:00 AM

Not too sure about you Gurlz, but I'd rather be found dead, naked and with a rainbow stuffed down my throat----rather than live in a fuking country where the ashtray-putter-in guy is making a six fig salary.

 

That's just frickin insane....

you should see how much the left front tire puter on guy gets.



#39 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:39 PM


 


So, Doggie, this is like blaming the woes of the entire south on the Republican party - you know, disease, obesity, shorter life spans, higher STD's, higher divorce rates, infant mortality off the charts, etc.
 
Could you ask your famed writer to comment on that...or is that an exception? Why do the states with "liberal democratic leadership" such as most of New England, CA, etc. lead the country in higher education and "smart" jobs?
 
Tough one, eh?
 
I can't believe you fall for that BS. Typical republican drivel.....blaming the victims! Ask all the white folks in SC and NC what happened to the mills that were there. They were first moved from new england because southerners would work for less and in worse conditions. Then the CEO's discovered Mexico and Asia. Bye Bye old south.....

When the takers are in charge the makers eventually move out and the result is Detroit.
 
 
This statement sort of shows your ignorance on the subject in my opinion. Either that or you know exactly what went wrong with the U.S. Auto industry and you wrote this just be a political troll.
 
The "makers" and "takers" were at fault in Detroit. The makers were interested in maximizing their return at the expense of long-term investment and customer satisfaction and the takers were interested in a diluted version of what the makers wanted. Over a decade the foreign car companies jumped on the opportunity presented by an out-of-touch Detroit and by the time they saw where the ship was headed they didn't have enough rudder to avoid the iceberg.
 
For instance, management knew that they needed to be responsive to customers rather than selling them blades for the razors, they knew by the early 1970s that the fashion of replacing cars every four years was dying fast, but they weren't set up to make much more than 5-year vehicles, things like zinc-coatings, wide-year replacement parts, and low-complexity designs required investment that would have required pay cuts in management that they weren't prepared to accept, and felt they didn't have to accept with the society of Ann Arbor doing as much to dictate the management policies of these companies than the response to customers. Similarly, the unions had the chance to use their bargaining positions to create worker-management boards, which would have helped the companies because the assembly-line workers, engineers and qc guys knew the process on a level that the suits didn't, they needed to be involved in the design and marketing of those vehicles and have a vote on the board through an ESOP. But just like management, they took the route to quick profits, low-vision, and instead just fought for a diluted version of what the suits fought, for better benefits/retirement and higher pay.
 
AMC did what they could to change the climate, but Ford and GM were in the rut, and they focused more on putting AMC out of business, rather than being responsive to Datsun and Honda, who were okay with seeing reduced profits from their contract supply chain and replacement parts in exchange for a higher quality product.
 
It's cute to reduce Detroit to some kind of lefty-vision gone wrong, but it doesn't really jibe with reality.
 
WTF does that have to do with the government spending more than it had coming in and making unrealistic promises?

Government is a function of revenue. Without revenue a fiscally conservative government will fall, and with revenue a fiscally liberal government will still succeed, sometimes even more than with a fiscally conservative government because the infrastructure stays ahead of the development.

Blaming the failure of Detroit on government and attempting to decouple the failure of industry is silly.

#40 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:46 PM

We really should have two threads - one for those who cannot separate the word Detroit from the "American" car companies and one for those few who realize that Detroit is a city with horrible problems - a billion dollar budget and 770 million in revenues being the specific problem being addressed by the bankruptcy.

But, if the Democratic non-partisan judge has her way, the bankruptcy won't touch the under funded pensions and retiree benefits.


As an ex industrial titan, Detroit has costs that a newer Sunbelt city does not. Middle class people can leave to better economies, while working class and poverty class people often don't have that ability, that leaves the city unbalanced. Or for example, Detroit still has to maintain infrastructure to a city that no longer has that level of revenue producing population, it's actually cheaper for the city (although still very expensive) to bulldoze old neighborhoods, turn under streets and sidewalks and sewage, turn it back to open space, rather than to leave it abandoned.

But you knew all this right?

#41 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 02:48 PM


What does that have to do with unfunded liabilities of the city?

Gonna be hard to explain if you don't already understand the way economics work...
 
Basics are that all those things would be funded if the population increased as normal and the economy increased, etc.
 
It's only because the bottom fell out that the problems were magnified. NYC and Philly are not having the same problems - or at least they are solvable. San Francisco, that bastion of Liberal Democracy, seems pretty good even though they pay for sex change operations for their municipal employees. 
 
Why?
 
It's the same with any business. Build up a business to a certain size and then have it cut in 1/2 or less.....you'll usually go bankrupt also. So, yes, ALL those things are what caused the problems.

Saorsa and Squirel (sic) don't seem to understand this, or perhaps just choose ignorance in order to foster political expediency.

#42 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 03:02 PM

 


What does that have to do with unfunded liabilities of the city?

Gonna be hard to explain if you don't already understand the way economics work...
 
Basics are that all those things would be funded if the population increased as normal and the economy increased, etc.
 
It's only because the bottom fell out that the problems were magnified. NYC and Philly are not having the same problems - or at least they are solvable. San Francisco, that bastion of Liberal Democracy, seems pretty good even though they pay for sex change operations for their municipal employees. 
 
Why?
 
It's the same with any business. Build up a business to a certain size and then have it cut in 1/2 or less.....you'll usually go bankrupt also. So, yes, ALL those things are what caused the problems.

Saorsa and Squirel (sic) don't seem to understand this, or perhaps just choose ignorance in order to foster political expediency.

 

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.



#43 learningj24

learningj24

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,839 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 03:44 PM

 

 


What does that have to do with unfunded liabilities of the city?

Gonna be hard to explain if you don't already understand the way economics work...
 
Basics are that all those things would be funded if the population increased as normal and the economy increased, etc.
 
It's only because the bottom fell out that the problems were magnified. NYC and Philly are not having the same problems - or at least they are solvable. San Francisco, that bastion of Liberal Democracy, seems pretty good even though they pay for sex change operations for their municipal employees. 
 
Why?
 
It's the same with any business. Build up a business to a certain size and then have it cut in 1/2 or less.....you'll usually go bankrupt also. So, yes, ALL those things are what caused the problems.

Saorsa and Squirel (sic) don't seem to understand this, or perhaps just choose ignorance in order to foster political expediency.

 

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.

Precisely.  Now explain to me why it's inappropriate for a CITY to count on the constant expansion of the tax base but appropriate for a COUNTRY to do so. We may, as a nation, have to address the concept of a sustainable and stable economy rather than a constantly expanding one.  As Europe has had to do more than once.



#44 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 05:03 PM

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.

 

Everyone's retirement back then was unfunded, and most forward capital costs were unfunded, it was the nature of a fast growing economy, that was the pay-as-you-go model and it had been used since WWII and before.

 

The idea of pre-funding retirements and pensions is relatively new, it wasn't until 2006 with the Postal Accountability Act that a very large organization got into the business of pre-funding their liabilities. And that's part of the reason why it was fairly simple to get a USPS job back before WWII and nearly impossible to get one now unless you're a disabled/veteran/minority and come to the hiring table with the equivalent of Federal hiring points. Now organizations are either matching employee contributions through 401ks or still carefully treading in pay-as-you-go or else pre-funding.

 

But you're apparently holding the Detroit of 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 up to the metric of 2013, and to me that's kind of silly. There are plenty of unfunded pensions that chug along without much problem because the revenue streams are there to keep them working. Detroit crashed hard because nobody saw how quickly the vehicle industry could change. Buffalo, NY was in a similar situation, their industry crashed and they had an enormous infrastructure that suddenly didn't have many customers. Like Pittsburgh, they pulled through by quickly adapting their economy, but until recently, the idea of hitting a traffic jam in Buffalo was rare, you just cruised along these massive roads and highways in a depopulated city, but the municipal workers that built that infrastructure and had to maintain it still had to be paid.

 

Detroit is making their own effort to diversify, and it's working, their economic recovery is in the top-10 nationally. Link.

 

The story you and Squirel (sic) are trying to promote is that Detroit is edging on (a perhaps unavoidable) bankruptcy because of some kind of "taker" philosophy in government. It's bullshit though, regardless your argument. Detroit had no choice but to build out that infrastructure as fast as industry demanded it (and that meant a pay-as-you-go pension for those workers) because there were other cities in the area that wanted that industry.

 

And further, Detroit's industry (as did most others) also ran their pensions and sometimes supply chains on pay-as-you-go. (That was part of the reason Toyota was able to grow so fast, they came into the U.S. without the massive retirement overhead). So it would have been completely unsustainable at the time for Detroit to pre-fund their pensions when the industry they were supporting wasn't doing the same thing.

 

We just thought back then that economies could grow forever, either that or we figured we would dump the problem on the next generation, which is essentially part of the mess we have today. But we're doing to the same thing to future generations too, so we're not just the victims, we're the victimizers too, we're dumping the problems of debt, nuclear waste and outdated infrastructure on future generations.



#45 d'ranger

d'ranger

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,222 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 05:03 PM

http://www.boston.co...PyAK/story.html

 

Good article on Detroit (and other old industrial US cities).  Please do not click or read if you need to think it is because Democrats and Unions ruined the city.  All by themselves.  Takers as it were. 



#46 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 05:10 PM

Precisely.  Now explain to me why it's inappropriate for a CITY to count on the constant expansion of the tax base but appropriate for a COUNTRY to do so. We may, as a nation, have to address the concept of a sustainable and stable economy rather than a constantly expanding one.  As Europe has had to do more than once.

 

That's a good point in comparing to Europe. In a sense, they have a certain economic maturity in expecting the economy to behave more like the ocean tides than the way we expected it behave like a juggernaut. (Of course, their economic maturity didn't extend to the EU, Greek and Italy blindsided them.)

 

Just as you ask why it's inappropriate for a city to count on constantly expanding revenue, but appropriate for a country, I think the deeper question is why do we think it's appropriate for corporations to count on constantly expanding revenue? The municipal, state and national governments ultimately just did what our corporations did.

 

We had been drinking at the milk of the client-state economy for so long that we had no idea what to do when the clients opted out. We couldn't go to war with all of them (i.e. Grenada) or depose their elected leaders (i.e. Mosadeq in Iran) and eventually we had to just let our revenue escape.

 

Welcome to the modern world, our new frugality is on the left.



#47 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 05:17 PM

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.

 

Everyone's retirement back then was unfunded, and most forward capital costs were unfunded, it was the nature of a fast growing economy, that was the pay-as-you-go model and it had been used since WWII and before.

 

The idea of pre-funding retirements and pensions is relatively new, it wasn't until 2006 with the Postal Accountability Act that a very large organization got into the business of pre-funding their liabilities. And that's part of the reason why it was fairly simple to get a USPS job back before WWII and nearly impossible to get one now unless you're a disabled/veteran/minority and come to the hiring table with the equivalent of Federal hiring points. Now organizations are either matching employee contributions through 401ks or still carefully treading in pay-as-you-go or else pre-funding.

 

But you're apparently holding the Detroit of 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 up to the metric of 2013, and to me that's kind of silly. There are plenty of unfunded pensions that chug along without much problem because the revenue streams are there to keep them working. Detroit crashed hard because nobody saw how quickly the vehicle industry could change. Buffalo, NY was in a similar situation, their industry crashed and they had an enormous infrastructure that suddenly didn't have many customers. Like Pittsburgh, they pulled through by quickly adapting their economy, but until recently, the idea of hitting a traffic jam in Buffalo was rare, you just cruised along these massive roads and highways in a depopulated city, but the municipal workers that built that infrastructure and had to maintain it still had to be paid.

 

Detroit is making their own effort to diversify, and it's working, their economic recovery is in the top-10 nationally. Link.

 

The story you and Squirel (sic) are trying to promote is that Detroit is edging on (a perhaps unavoidable) bankruptcy because of some kind of "taker" philosophy in government. It's bullshit though, regardless your argument. Detroit had no choice but to build out that infrastructure as fast as industry demanded it (and that meant a pay-as-you-go pension for those workers) because there were other cities in the area that wanted that industry.

 

And further, Detroit's industry (as did most others) also ran their pensions and sometimes supply chains on pay-as-you-go. (That was part of the reason Toyota was able to grow so fast, they came into the U.S. without the massive retirement overhead). So it would have been completely unsustainable at the time for Detroit to pre-fund their pensions when the industry they were supporting wasn't doing the same thing.

 

We just thought back then that economies could grow forever, either that or we figured we would dump the problem on the next generation, which is essentially part of the mess we have today. But we're doing to the same thing to future generations too, so we're not just the victims, we're the victimizers too, we're dumping the problems of debt, nuclear waste and outdated infrastructure on future generations.

 

No, actually, I come from a city that 'died' when the steel mill moved out.  But, we survived and it was before folks felt the feds had to come in and make things good.

 

Like I said, believing anything will grow forever is irrational.

 

I've also pointed out before that the main reason for our success in the 50s and 60s is that we were the only industrial nation in the world who still had a working base and infrastructure.  We made a lot out of helping the Europeans and Asians re-establish their economies.  That should have been a  clear sign that the growth would normalize after some years.  That certainly wasn't an excuse to just keep spending or believe that the growth curve could be sustained.



#48 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 21 July 2013 - 05:22 PM

Which is why I would never buy a new German built car.

 

Ever.....

 

But you're hunky dory with buying German-designed firearms?

 

 

Designed? Or Built? Makes quite a difference. But you know that....



#49 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 06:38 PM

It's the summer of 1967. One of the best selling cars that year was this one:
 
1967_Chevy_Impala_Details_by_rjonesdesig
 
About a million Impalas were sold in 1967. That summer there was a race riot in parts of Detroit. Over the next three years, Detroit lost so much that it would never recover. Coleman Young said it well:

 

The heaviest casualty, however, was the city. Detroit's losses went a hell of a lot deeper than the immediate toll of lives and buildings. The riot put Detroit on the fast track to economic desolation, mugging the city and making off with incalculable value in jobs, earnings taxes, corporate taxes, retail dollars, sales taxes, mortgages, interest, property taxes, development dollars, investment dollars, tourism dollars, and plain damn money. The money was carried out in the pockets of the businesses and the white people who fled as fast as they could. The white exodus from Detroit had been prodigiously steady prior to the riot, totally twenty-two thousand in 1966, but afterwards it was frantic. In 1967, with less than half the year remaining after the summer explosion—the outward population migration reached sixty-seven thousand. In 1968 the figure hit eighty-thousand, followed by forty-six thousand in 1969.

 

Of the 1.6 million whites in Detroit at the end of WW2, 1.4 million have left the city.

 

The 50's and 60's were the heyday of the Big 3 but the end of Detroit as a viable city.



#50 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 21 July 2013 - 07:52 PM

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.

 

Actually, you don't understand it.

ALL municipalities, counties and other government and corporate entities plan on continued growth. Either that or they don't plan at all because they will be long gone and collecting their pensions, etc....

 

For you to act as if (historically) cities planned for loss of their entire tax base....is beyond ridiculous. Monday morning QBing at it's best.



#51 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 08:06 PM

 

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.

 

Everyone's retirement back then was unfunded, and most forward capital costs were unfunded, it was the nature of a fast growing economy, that was the pay-as-you-go model and it had been used since WWII and before.

 

The idea of pre-funding retirements and pensions is relatively new, it wasn't until 2006 with the Postal Accountability Act that a very large organization got into the business of pre-funding their liabilities. And that's part of the reason why it was fairly simple to get a USPS job back before WWII and nearly impossible to get one now unless you're a disabled/veteran/minority and come to the hiring table with the equivalent of Federal hiring points. Now organizations are either matching employee contributions through 401ks or still carefully treading in pay-as-you-go or else pre-funding.

 

But you're apparently holding the Detroit of 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 up to the metric of 2013, and to me that's kind of silly. There are plenty of unfunded pensions that chug along without much problem because the revenue streams are there to keep them working. Detroit crashed hard because nobody saw how quickly the vehicle industry could change. Buffalo, NY was in a similar situation, their industry crashed and they had an enormous infrastructure that suddenly didn't have many customers. Like Pittsburgh, they pulled through by quickly adapting their economy, but until recently, the idea of hitting a traffic jam in Buffalo was rare, you just cruised along these massive roads and highways in a depopulated city, but the municipal workers that built that infrastructure and had to maintain it still had to be paid.

 

Detroit is making their own effort to diversify, and it's working, their economic recovery is in the top-10 nationally. Link.

 

The story you and Squirel (sic) are trying to promote is that Detroit is edging on (a perhaps unavoidable) bankruptcy because of some kind of "taker" philosophy in government. It's bullshit though, regardless your argument. Detroit had no choice but to build out that infrastructure as fast as industry demanded it (and that meant a pay-as-you-go pension for those workers) because there were other cities in the area that wanted that industry.

 

And further, Detroit's industry (as did most others) also ran their pensions and sometimes supply chains on pay-as-you-go. (That was part of the reason Toyota was able to grow so fast, they came into the U.S. without the massive retirement overhead). So it would have been completely unsustainable at the time for Detroit to pre-fund their pensions when the industry they were supporting wasn't doing the same thing.

 

We just thought back then that economies could grow forever, either that or we figured we would dump the problem on the next generation, which is essentially part of the mess we have today. But we're doing to the same thing to future generations too, so we're not just the victims, we're the victimizers too, we're dumping the problems of debt, nuclear waste and outdated infrastructure on future generations.

 

No, actually, I come from a city that 'died' when the steel mill moved out.  But, we survived and it was before folks felt the feds had to come in and make things good.

 

Like I said, believing anything will grow forever is irrational.

 

I've also pointed out before that the main reason for our success in the 50s and 60s is that we were the only industrial nation in the world who still had a working base and infrastructure.  We made a lot out of helping the Europeans and Asians re-establish their economies.  That should have been a  clear sign that the growth would normalize after some years.  That certainly wasn't an excuse to just keep spending or believe that the growth curve could be sustained.

 

I agree with that last paragraph, but you need to qualify that as a symptom of our industry, not our politics.

 

As for the rest ... from which city did you come that died when the steel mill moved out? If it was much bigger than a small town, I'll wager they used a pay-as-you-go pension plan for their employees, just like Detroit.

 

I'll also wager that if your city recovered from an economic collapse, that if you tell me the name of the city, that I can look up a big porkload of Federal contracts that took advantage of it, and that the Feds did in fact -- on some level -- make "things good."



#52 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 08:18 PM

 

Which is why I would never buy a new German built car.

 

Ever.....

 

But you're hunky dory with buying German-designed firearms?

 

 

Designed? Or Built? Makes quite a difference. But you know that....

 

Depends ... I suspect you have one or two German-built weapons.

 

As for the difference between design and built ... there is a difference, but not as much as you seem to suggest. My WWII-vet dad would never buy a German-designed automobile, even one built in another country, he was pissed at that particular German industry (and a few others) for support of the Nazi program. He had brought back an officer's Luger after the war as a trophy, but then threw it into the lake when he got back.

 

Mostly out of deference to him and other relatives, I won't buy a German-built or German-designed vehicle, I don't care if it's made in Alabama, it's still a German vehicle. I love a lot of contemporary German art, literature, music beer, food, furniture, scientific instruments, optics, etc.. I have no problem with modern Germany.  I won't own a Mauser or Luger though, regardless if it was built in German, Sweden, Norway, Chile, etc., in fact I've never even held one and have no plans to get one.

 

I just thought it odd that you held some kind of grudge against Germany for their vehicles, but not their weapons.



#53 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 09:05 PM

 

 

No, I understand it.  I don't understand why the city needed to create unfunded liabilities.

 

At what point were there retiree expenses covered under some reasonable actuarial basis?  The irrational belief that the tax base will expand forever to cover expenses from current income is stupid.

 

Everyone's retirement back then was unfunded, and most forward capital costs were unfunded, it was the nature of a fast growing economy, that was the pay-as-you-go model and it had been used since WWII and before.

 

The idea of pre-funding retirements and pensions is relatively new, it wasn't until 2006 with the Postal Accountability Act that a very large organization got into the business of pre-funding their liabilities. And that's part of the reason why it was fairly simple to get a USPS job back before WWII and nearly impossible to get one now unless you're a disabled/veteran/minority and come to the hiring table with the equivalent of Federal hiring points. Now organizations are either matching employee contributions through 401ks or still carefully treading in pay-as-you-go or else pre-funding.

 

But you're apparently holding the Detroit of 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 up to the metric of 2013, and to me that's kind of silly. There are plenty of unfunded pensions that chug along without much problem because the revenue streams are there to keep them working. Detroit crashed hard because nobody saw how quickly the vehicle industry could change. Buffalo, NY was in a similar situation, their industry crashed and they had an enormous infrastructure that suddenly didn't have many customers. Like Pittsburgh, they pulled through by quickly adapting their economy, but until recently, the idea of hitting a traffic jam in Buffalo was rare, you just cruised along these massive roads and highways in a depopulated city, but the municipal workers that built that infrastructure and had to maintain it still had to be paid.

 

Detroit is making their own effort to diversify, and it's working, their economic recovery is in the top-10 nationally. Link.

 

The story you and Squirel (sic) are trying to promote is that Detroit is edging on (a perhaps unavoidable) bankruptcy because of some kind of "taker" philosophy in government. It's bullshit though, regardless your argument. Detroit had no choice but to build out that infrastructure as fast as industry demanded it (and that meant a pay-as-you-go pension for those workers) because there were other cities in the area that wanted that industry.

 

And further, Detroit's industry (as did most others) also ran their pensions and sometimes supply chains on pay-as-you-go. (That was part of the reason Toyota was able to grow so fast, they came into the U.S. without the massive retirement overhead). So it would have been completely unsustainable at the time for Detroit to pre-fund their pensions when the industry they were supporting wasn't doing the same thing.

 

We just thought back then that economies could grow forever, either that or we figured we would dump the problem on the next generation, which is essentially part of the mess we have today. But we're doing to the same thing to future generations too, so we're not just the victims, we're the victimizers too, we're dumping the problems of debt, nuclear waste and outdated infrastructure on future generations.

 

No, actually, I come from a city that 'died' when the steel mill moved out.  But, we survived and it was before folks felt the feds had to come in and make things good.

 

Like I said, believing anything will grow forever is irrational.

 

I've also pointed out before that the main reason for our success in the 50s and 60s is that we were the only industrial nation in the world who still had a working base and infrastructure.  We made a lot out of helping the Europeans and Asians re-establish their economies.  That should have been a  clear sign that the growth would normalize after some years.  That certainly wasn't an excuse to just keep spending or believe that the growth curve could be sustained.

 

I agree with that last paragraph, but you need to qualify that as a symptom of our industry, not our politics.

 

As for the rest ... from which city did you come that died when the steel mill moved out? If it was much bigger than a small town, I'll wager they used a pay-as-you-go pension plan for their employees, just like Detroit.

 

I'll also wager that if your city recovered from an economic collapse, that if you tell me the name of the city, that I can look up a big porkload of Federal contracts that took advantage of it, and that the Feds did in fact -- on some level -- make "things good."

 

What are you calling a symptom of our industry?  There are several factors there.  The first and most obvious that we had no competition.  The second was the seeming belief that none would ever arrive and growth would continue forever.

 

As to the city, Here, Yale was trying to write a case study of watching it die when US Steel closed the Tube Mill.  The book they wrote gives a lot of credit to the local union leader for saving it.   But, it was supposed to be a union/management study so only the union and mill management get mentioned.  Read it and find out that most of the action came from the local business and religious community.  The town got saved that time but it wasn't long afterward that the mill did close and all the production moved to Gary.  The town survived.  The local union leader tried to parlay 'his success' into a political career but the highest he got was one term in the state senate and  a trip as a delegate to the democratic convention.

 

The town survived because a lot of small manufacturing businesses were able to expand somewhat.  These were not steel mills but the makers of specialty steel products the US Steel folks kept trying to form unions in the other shops but every one of them was rejected.

 

One of those is the mill my father worked in.  It's now a nationwide group and still a family owned and managed steel business.



#54 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 21 July 2013 - 09:19 PM

 a trophy, but then threw it into the lake when he got back.

 

Mostly out of deference to him and other relatives, I won't buy a German-built or German-designed vehicle, I don't care if it's made in Alabama, it's still a German vehicle. I love a lot of contemporary German art, literature, music beer, food, furniture, scientific instruments, optics, etc.. I have no problem with modern Germany.  I won't own a Mauser or Luger though, regardless if it was built in German, Sweden, Norway, Chile, etc., in fact I've never even held one and have no plans to get one.

 

I just thought it odd that you held some kind of grudge against Germany for their vehicles, but not their weapons.

But you'd buy a Japanese one?

 

Interesting....

 

I just read Unbroken and found the vast difference between the German and Japanese treatment of POW"s quite stark....while I understand the Jewish thing (my ancestors left Russia during the pogroms), American veterans would have much more reason to be angered at Japan...

 

The figures reported in the book were something like 10 to 20X as many POW's in Japan died in terms of percentages. I think the figures were 1.5% in German hands and 30% in Japanese....

 

Anyway, rest assured that everything from the money you use (german printing presses) to the drugs you buy (chemical plants, phama plants) to vast other parts of your daily life are german designed and/or built. 

 

Anyway, back to the plants. Elmwood City is really a tiny township part of the vast industrial complex that was Pittsburgh. And, yes, the entire rust belt died....pretty much, although some parts are coming back in a post-industrial way. 

 

My son specialized in photography of those dead plants and towns. 

Bottom line - Detroit is no different than much of the rest of the rust belt except that it is/was very concentrated and one of the last to die...



#55 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 11:31 PM

What are you calling a symptom of our industry?  There are several factors there.  The first and most obvious that we had no competition.  The second was the seeming belief that none would ever arrive and growth would continue forever.

 

As to the city, Here, Yale was trying to write a case study of watching it die when US Steel closed the Tube Mill.  The book they wrote gives a lot of credit to the local union leader for saving it.   But, it was supposed to be a union/management study so only the union and mill management get mentioned.  Read it and find out that most of the action came from the local business and religious community.  The town got saved that time but it wasn't long afterward that the mill did close and all the production moved to Gary.  The town survived.  The local union leader tried to parlay 'his success' into a political career but the highest he got was one term in the state senate and  a trip as a delegate to the democratic convention.

 

The town survived because a lot of small manufacturing businesses were able to expand somewhat.  These were not steel mills but the makers of specialty steel products the US Steel folks kept trying to form unions in the other shops but every one of them was rejected.

 

One of those is the mill my father worked in.  It's now a nationwide group and still a family owned and managed steel business.

 

You mentioned unfunded liabilities as the problem in Detroit. I suggested that there was no way anyone could do anything other than pay-as-you-go back when because that's what industry was doing. If cities wanted those factories, they needed to ramp up infrastructure as quickly as industry demanded it, and that meant they had to use pay-as-you-go as well.

 

If a renegade city decided to be fiscally conservative during the go-go years and wait until their new infrastructure was fully funded in both the materials and the pensions of the people needed to build and manage them, they would have lost that development, because for every factory there were two cities competing for the business.

 

Is the city you mention as not being the recipient of Federal largesse, Allentown? Not to get off topic, but Allentown has received plenty of Congressionally Directed Projects, Federal projects and defense projects. They did a good job restructuring the economy, but it wasn't exactly in a Fed-free vacuum.



#56 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 11:54 PM

But you'd buy a Japanese one?

 

It doesn't bother me. My uncle fought in the Pacific, he didn't have any kind of grudge against Japan. And my dad's grudge isn't against Germany, it's against parts of the German auto industry that benefited from Nazi slave labor, like Volkswagon, BMW, Bayer, Mercedes and Krupp. Other German companies didn't apparently participate in the slave labor programs.

Of course, even G.M. and Ford benefited from the Nazis, but G.M. did cut off ties with Opel when the Nazis took over, while Ford (although they claimed otherwise for years) did maintain ties with Fordwerk, which used slave labor before the Nazis put the company into their portfolio. But out of G.M. and Ford, G.M. was perhaps a bit more honest, though they had no problem taking in Opel profits which were made during the Nazi years.

I know that Japan had their own horrors against the Pacific Rim, but it's somewhat balanced out by our own ridiculous actions of imprisoning Japanese Americans. And on the order of scale, Japan couldn't touch the horrors of Germany.

 

I just read Unbroken and found the vast difference between the German and Japanese treatment of POW"s quite stark....while I understand the Jewish thing (my ancestors left Russia during the pogroms), American veterans would have much more reason to be angered at Japan...

 

Maybe in your opinion. But in practice, in my family, it wasn't like that at all. The Japanese were warriors, they were brutal, but thy had some level of honor that the Nazis couldn't emulate. My relatives who fought in the Pacific didn't hold a grudge against the Japanese, the ones who fought in Europe held a grudge against the Nazis. Not a grudge against Germany, but against the Nazis.

 

The figures reported in the book were something like 10 to 20X as many POW's in Japan died in terms of percentages. I think the figures were 1.5% in German hands and 30% in Japanese....

 

That was partly cultural, Europe/U.S. had less cultural commonality with Japan. You need to put Germany's treatment in context ... they had slave labor death camps and it behooved them to demonstrate to the Red Cross that they treated POW's with a level of respect. No doubt, Japan was a brutal conquerer, many Chinese still can't forgive them. But what was missing was the mechanized, engineered death of the Nazis. Japan fought a brutal war without a handle on an end game. Germany seemed to be engineering a society, they wanted happy Americans because they were reasonably confident after their conquest of Europe, that a Nazi USA was right around the corner, with a whole country full of Jews, Homosexuals and probably Africans to work their war machine. The Nazi's evil transcended war, it set a new limit to brutality. Japan couldn't do that.

 

In some ways, the U.S.A. and Britain were as brutal as Japan, we bombed the hell out of Dresden for possibly dubious reasons, and of course we incinerated tens of thousands on tens of thousands of people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Maybe the reason I saw no grudges against Japan is because of the guilt over bombing Nagasaki.

 

 

Anyway, rest assured that everything from the money you use (german printing presses) to the drugs you buy (chemical plants, phama plants) to vast other parts of your daily life are german designed and/or built.

 

I have used Heidelberg printing presses, but I prefer the Japanese and Czech presses because the drum pressure is controlled better in my opinion and the dot gain is reduced. I avoid Bayer if possible, and I specifically avoid the German companies that used slave labor from the death camps. http://www.theawfultruth.com/salbmw/

Again, I have no problem with Germany, or German products. I just avoid giving my money to companies that used slave labor from the Nazi concentration camps.



#57 mikeys clone no1

mikeys clone no1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,675 posts
  • Location:mikes left foot

Posted 22 July 2013 - 12:13 AM

seriously? never heard of the atrocities of the thai/burma railway? hellfire pass? sandakan march? nanking? comfort women?

 

mikey, you really need to get a clue.



#58 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 12:19 AM

All well and good, Mike, but I have to say - given my small amount of knowledge on the subject - that the Japanese were much worse in their treatment of POW's...which cannot be compared to internment!

http://library.think...74/japanese.htm

 

American leadership "forgave" the Japanese war criminals (part of the book) because they wanted to normalize and use the Japanese for our industrial policy. 

 

Read some of that link. Nothing comparable was done to Americans in Germany. Not even close.

 

The treatment of civilians by the SS and Nazi insiders was/is another story altogether. But I would have much rather have been an American caught by the Germans as opposed to the Japanese....

 

As to which one I'd rather have been a civilian under - that's another story! But just the Rape of Nanking was 200,000 to 300,000 estimated murders of Chinese. 

 

I like to think that most armed Germans (army, air force, etc.) were quite civilized when it came to the prosecution of war - the big problems were with the elites (SS, etc.) and certain high placed politicians. The Japanese seemed to have been more militarized as a culture....down to the last man, although I am sure many of them rejected it inwardly. 

 

How about Siemens and Thyssen-Krupp? 

 

Many of my parents jewish friends would not touch german products either. But my dad was very liberal, probably because he was too young to fight in the war (b 1930). Once he owned his own factory, he bought a MB and mom got a Daimler Convertible! 



#59 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 12:55 AM

Hey Doggie, since you seem to be a genius on this matters, please inform us why:

 

1. Boise County, ID - probably a GOP stronghold - filed for bankruptcy.

2. Jefferson County, AL - which voted GOP in every election up to and including both GW elections, filed for bankruptcy.

3. San Bernadino, CA - which voted GOP in at least 2/3 of the elections of the past couple of decades - also filed.

3. San Joaquin County (Stockton) - pretty much the same! GOP in 80% of elections until recently. Belly up....

 

Are these places all "takers" and lazy asses?



#60 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 01:13 AM

What are you calling a symptom of our industry?  There are several factors there.  The first and most obvious that we had no competition.  The second was the seeming belief that none would ever arrive and growth would continue forever.

 

As to the city, Here, Yale was trying to write a case study of watching it die when US Steel closed the Tube Mill.  The book they wrote gives a lot of credit to the local union leader for saving it.   But, it was supposed to be a union/management study so only the union and mill management get mentioned.  Read it and find out that most of the action came from the local business and religious community.  The town got saved that time but it wasn't long afterward that the mill did close and all the production moved to Gary.  The town survived.  The local union leader tried to parlay 'his success' into a political career but the highest he got was one term in the state senate and  a trip as a delegate to the democratic convention.

 

The town survived because a lot of small manufacturing businesses were able to expand somewhat.  These were not steel mills but the makers of specialty steel products the US Steel folks kept trying to form unions in the other shops but every one of them was rejected.

 

One of those is the mill my father worked in.  It's now a nationwide group and still a family owned and managed steel business.

 

You mentioned unfunded liabilities as the problem in Detroit. I suggested that there was no way anyone could do anything other than pay-as-you-go back when because that's what industry was doing. If cities wanted those factories, they needed to ramp up infrastructure as quickly as industry demanded it, and that meant they had to use pay-as-you-go as well.

 

If a renegade city decided to be fiscally conservative during the go-go years and wait until their new infrastructure was fully funded in both the materials and the pensions of the people needed to build and manage them, they would have lost that development, because for every factory there were two cities competing for the business.

 

Is the city you mention as not being the recipient of Federal largesse, Allentown? Not to get off topic, but Allentown has received plenty of Congressionally Directed Projects, Federal projects and defense projects. They did a good job restructuring the economy, but it wasn't exactly in a Fed-free vacuum.

 

No, it's Ellwood City which you could have figured out by following any of the links.  Like most other steeltowns they did a lot of government business during the war.



#61 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:08 AM

Hey Doggie, since you seem to be a genius on this matters, please inform us why:
 
1. Boise County, ID - probably a GOP stronghold - filed for bankruptcy. Result of a law suit.
2. Jefferson County, AL - which voted GOP in every election up to and including both GW elections, filed for bankruptcy. Ripped off by Wall Street
3. San Bernadino, CA - which voted GOP in at least 2/3 of the elections of the past couple of decades - also filed. Has not filed
3. San Joaquin County (Stockton) - pretty much the same! GOP in 80% of elections until recently. Belly up....[/size]Look it up yourself.
 

Are these places all "takers" and lazy asses?



#62 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 03:24 AM

Ah, so the others are "the result" of things - but Reaganomics and Wall Street had nothing to do with outsourcing, union busting, etc???

 

Perfect, Doggie. 

 

Thanks....for the illustration that things are not quite what they seem and your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 

 

The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?



#63 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 06:06 AM

seriously? never heard of the atrocities of the thai/burma railway? hellfire pass? sandakan march? nanking? comfort women?

 

mikey, you really need to get a clue.

 

RIF. Reading is Fundamental there Sheet.

 

I acknowledged the Japanese atrocities. Then we evened the score by committing an atrocity against them that changed the world.

 

YOU need to get a clue ... the Japanese committed atrocities in wartime, if you had bothered to read what I wrote, you might have written intelligently. But again, there is a difference between atrocities committed because of a war, and wars commenced in order to facilitate atrocities.



#64 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 06:13 AM

All well and good, Mike, but I have to say - given my small amount of knowledge on the subject - that the Japanese were much worse in their treatment of POW's...which cannot be compared to internment!

http://library.think...74/japanese.htm

 

American leadership "forgave" the Japanese war criminals (part of the book) because they wanted to normalize and use the Japanese for our industrial policy. 

 

Read some of that link. Nothing comparable was done to Americans in Germany. Not even close.

 

The treatment of civilians by the SS and Nazi insiders was/is another story altogether. But I would have much rather have been an American caught by the Germans as opposed to the Japanese....

 

As to which one I'd rather have been a civilian under - that's another story! But just the Rape of Nanking was 200,000 to 300,000 estimated murders of Chinese. 

 

I like to think that most armed Germans (army, air force, etc.) were quite civilized when it came to the prosecution of war - the big problems were with the elites (SS, etc.) and certain high placed politicians. The Japanese seemed to have been more militarized as a culture....down to the last man, although I am sure many of them rejected it inwardly. 

 

How about Siemens and Thyssen-Krupp? 

 

Many of my parents jewish friends would not touch german products either. But my dad was very liberal, probably because he was too young to fight in the war (b 1930). Once he owned his own factory, he bought a MB and mom got a Daimler Convertible! 

 

Do you think that Americans are so shallow that we only base our grudges on what people did to us? We were very good to the German POWs, set them up stateside and supposedly treated them well, we understood Germany, they were like us. We didn't understand Japan, they didn't understand us, we imprisoned them in our country, we tortured their POWs, they tortured ours.  (As an aside, your suggestion that the Germans were always civil to American POWs was disputed by my dad, he told me of the Bulge where any GI that was caught with a Springfield -- as opposed to an M1 -- was summarily executed as a sniper.) He also told me about coming on a battle from U.S. ### Airborne (I'm withholding the number to not offend) that executed every German prisoner that they took and left the bodies in the dirt. Even now, we do horrible things to our POWs, we torture them on waterboards, lock them away from humanity for years on years, rape them and humiliate them. Hopefully that

 

You're theorizing about these things, but I had it from the horse's mouth, from my uncles and dad who fought in WWII. I've heard of grudges against the Japanese for their war crimes, but again, you're comparing Japan to Germany, and Germany to Japan. That wasn't the issue, my relatives have no grudges that I know against Germany, it's against the Nazis, and companies that used slave labor from the Concentration Camps.

 

The Japanese did horrible things to their enemies, we do horrible things to our enemies. But the Nazis did horrible things to their own people, vast segments of their own people. That alone puts them in a different kind of league, the one inhabited by the Khmer Rouge and the Stalinists.



#65 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 11:06 AM

Ah, so the others are "the result" of things - but Reaganomics and Wall Street had nothing to do with outsourcing, union busting, etc???
 
Perfect, Doggie. 
 
Thanks....for the illustration that things are not quite what they seem and your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 
 
The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

The execs did play a part. They took too short a view allowing the unions aided by their corrupt politicians to impose onerous labor contracts that made them un- competitive in a global market. The city approved public sector unions contracts with legacy costs that could not be supported by the declining tax base.
The first rule of parasites...don't kill the host.

#66 tuk tuk joe

tuk tuk joe

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,776 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 11:27 AM

Due to globalization most of the production has been moved offshore (US is the major proponent) i.e. establish free trade then move production over seas and import. Not exactly rocket science after all......

#67 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 01:23 PM

. . .  your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 

 

The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

 

No. But it's useless having a discussion with you. You haven't even done any research.



#68 Chuck D.

Chuck D.

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,616 posts
  • Location:Harrison Twp.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 01:59 PM

. . .  your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 

 

The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

 

No. But it's useless having a discussion with you. You haven't even done any research.

 

Squirrel:  at the risk of insulting everyone else who has responded to this thread, you're the only one here who has a clue.  

 

As far as I'm concerned, the biggest factors in the decline of THE CITY of Detroit were (in no particular order) the establishment of the interstate highway system, the availability of cheap land to sprawl out the metropolitan area into an extensive suburban monstrosity, and, yes, racism.



#69 kmccabe

kmccabe

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,881 posts
  • Location:Belly of the Beast.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:01 PM

Do you think that Americans are so shallow that we only base our grudges on what people did to us? We were very good to the German POWs, set them up stateside and supposedly treated them well, we understood Germany, they were like us. We didn't understand Japan, they didn't understand us, we imprisoned them in our country, we tortured their POWs, they tortured ours.  (As an aside, your suggestion that the Germans were always civil to American POWs was disputed by my dad, he told me of the Bulge where any GI that was caught with a Springfield -- as opposed to an M1 -- was summarily executed as a sniper.) He also told me about coming on a battle from U.S. ### Airborne (I'm withholding the number to not offend) that executed every German prisoner that they took and left the bodies in the dirt. Even now, we do horrible things to our POWs, we torture them on waterboards, lock them away from humanity for years on years, rape them and humiliate them. Hopefully that

 

You're theorizing about these things, but I had it from the horse's mouth, from my uncles and dad who fought in WWII. I've heard of grudges against the Japanese for their war crimes, but again, you're comparing Japan to Germany, and Germany to Japan. That wasn't the issue, my relatives have no grudges that I know against Germany, it's against the Nazis, and companies that used slave labor from the Concentration Camps.

 

The Japanese did horrible things to their enemies, we do horrible things to our enemies. But the Nazis did horrible things to their own people, vast segments of their own people. That alone puts them in a different kind of league, the one inhabited by the Khmer Rouge and the Stalinists.

 

Well said Mike.



#70 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,106 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:29 PM

Any idiot knows that Detroit is an example of the failures of Socialism and Socialisticalisticalists.  



#71 Chuck D.

Chuck D.

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,616 posts
  • Location:Harrison Twp.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:53 PM

EVERY idiot knows that Detroit is an example of the failures of Socialism and Socialisticalisticalists.  

 

Fixed.



#72 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,106 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:54 PM

EVERY idiot knows that Detroit is an example of the failures of Socialism and Socialisticalisticalists.  

 

Fixed.

6 vs. 1/2 Dozen.  



#73 d'ranger

d'ranger

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,222 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:55 PM

A six or two threes. 



#74 kmccabe

kmccabe

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,881 posts
  • Location:Belly of the Beast.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 03:03 PM

and a wink is as good as a nod to a blind man.



#75 jetboy

jetboy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 05:24 PM

Starting today, what would you do to turn Detroit into a city that attracts businesses and people? How do you get a handle on crime?  How do you solve the financial mess in a way that doesn't discourage businesses from considering Detroit? 


What's your game plan for "fixing" Detroit?



#76 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 05:53 PM

Ah, so the others are "the result" of things - but Reaganomics and Wall Street had nothing to do with outsourcing, union busting, etc???
 
Perfect, Doggie. 
 
Thanks....for the illustration that things are not quite what they seem and your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 
 
The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

The execs did play a part. They took too short a view allowing the unions aided by their corrupt politicians to impose onerous labor contracts that made them un- competitive in a global market. The city approved public sector unions contracts with legacy costs that could not be supported by the declining tax base.
The first rule of parasites...don't kill the host.

 

You seem to have skipped over the part where the execs made lousy cars.....which caused them not to adapt and grow properly and go bust.

 

 

Again, the German makers never went bust.....and now they make twice as many passenger cars as we do with a population and GDP 1/4 of ours - AND, they pay them MUCH more than even the old American union workers.

 

Explain to me carefully how that is the case? It should be simple.



#77 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 22 July 2013 - 05:58 PM

Starting today, what would you do to turn Detroit into a city that attracts businesses and people? How do you get a handle on crime?  How do you solve the financial mess in a way that doesn't discourage businesses from considering Detroit? 


What's your game plan for "fixing" Detroit?

 

Go through the bankruptcy and adjust the bonds, the pensions, the benefits and everything else to reflect the worst case future scenario. Then largely let history take it's course. You can't "fake" the growth of a city, only hope that once the finances are set into order that people will find it a nice place to live and do business.

 

Why would I want to work in Detroit when I could work in Windsor across the bridge and get universal health care and much less racism and violence? 

 

Oh, Canadian union auto workers make more money too. Yet Windsor has not closed it's door yet.

"Windsor was recently listed as the number two large city for economic potential in North-America and number 7 large city of the future in North America according to theFDI North-American cities of the future list. (American Cities of the Future 2011/12)"



#78 jetboy

jetboy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 06:27 PM

 

Ah, so the others are "the result" of things - but Reaganomics and Wall Street had nothing to do with outsourcing, union busting, etc???
 
Perfect, Doggie. 
 
Thanks....for the illustration that things are not quite what they seem and your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 
 
The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

The execs did play a part. They took too short a view allowing the unions aided by their corrupt politicians to impose onerous labor contracts that made them un- competitive in a global market. The city approved public sector unions contracts with legacy costs that could not be supported by the declining tax base.
The first rule of parasites...don't kill the host.

 

You seem to have skipped over the part where the execs made lousy cars.....which caused them not to adapt and grow properly and go bust.

 

 

Again, the German makers never went bust.....and now they make twice as many passenger cars as we do with a population and GDP 1/4 of ours - AND, they pay them MUCH more than even the old American union workers.

 

Explain to me carefully how that is the case? It should be simple.

China produces 14 million passenger cars per year.  They haven't gone bust either.  Weird....  (and some of the German auto makers were "bailed out" by having to get the government to sign on to back loans, and getting direct government loans - let's not pretend they were immune.)

 

And why are we talking about passenger cars?  To skew against the US where trucks and SUVs are more popular?  I'm sure Germany produces more lederhosen and wooden clocks too.  In terms of motor vehicles, the US far exceeds Germany in annual production - by about 2 million vehicles per year.  Germany is 4th in line after China, USA, Japan.  Probably 5th in the next few years after South Korea.

 

For other fun facts, there are roughly twice as many vehicles owned per capita in the USA than the EU. 



#79 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 06:29 PM

Ah, so the others are "the result" of things - but Reaganomics and Wall Street had nothing to do with outsourcing, union busting, etc???
 
Perfect, Doggie. 
 
Thanks....for the illustration that things are not quite what they seem and your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 
 
The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

The execs did play a part. They took too short a view allowing the unions aided by their corrupt politicians to impose onerous labor contracts that made them un- competitive in a global market. The city approved public sector unions contracts with legacy costs that could not be supported by the declining tax base.
The first rule of parasites...don't kill the host.

 
You seem to have skipped over the part where the execs made lousy cars.....which caused them not to adapt and grow properly and go bust.
 
 
Again, the German makers never went bust.....and now they make twice as many passenger cars as we do with a population and GDP 1/4 of ours - AND, they pay them MUCH more than even the old American union workers.
 
Explain to me carefully how that is the case? It should be simple.
Yes there was a decline in the auto industry as the big 3 were slow to react to the emergence of global competition as Europe and Japan rebuilt after WW2. That said, Detroit’s legacy costs are over half its budget, (let that sink in). How the fuck does that happen? Politicians bought and paid for by public sector unions.

#80 d'ranger

d'ranger

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,222 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 06:33 PM

China rarely goes bust (solar panels being the lone exception that I know if) because the government insures that they won't. GM is the largest foreign manufacturer there too.  Weird.  huh.

 

US manufacturers ignored the small car market as the big money was in trucks and SUVs.  The small cars they made were almost all crap.  That has now changed, thanks in part to the conditions of the GM and Chrysler bailout.  I have owned several Toyotas and one was a lemon.  I see that few posters bothered to read the article I linked a couple of day ago.  Detroit is the most severely affected of the old manufacturing cities.  It would help if people focused on how to recover instead of just pointing fingers, plenty of blame to go around. 



#81 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 07:51 PM


Ah, so the others are "the result" of things - but Reaganomics and Wall Street had nothing to do with outsourcing, union busting, etc???
 
Perfect, Doggie. 
 
Thanks....for the illustration that things are not quite what they seem and your conclusions are often just ones you came to before you actually did your research. 
 
The execs at the Big Three were probably responsible for the decline of Detroit more than any single players. Really, can't you agree on that?

The execs did play a part. They took too short a view allowing the unions aided by their corrupt politicians to impose onerous labor contracts that made them un- competitive in a global market. The city approved public sector unions contracts with legacy costs that could not be supported by the declining tax base.
The first rule of parasites...don't kill the host.
 
You seem to have skipped over the part where the execs made lousy cars.....which caused them not to adapt and grow properly and go bust.
 
 
Again, the German makers never went bust.....and now they make twice as many passenger cars as we do with a population and GDP 1/4 of ours - AND, they pay them MUCH more than even the old American union workers.
 
Explain to me carefully how that is the case? It should be simple.

We had friends who worked at the Mercedes plant in Tuscaloosa. The working climate was described as more equitable, the higher level engineers and financial managers didn't make salaries that much higher than the line workers, around 50% more, but not the 100% and 200% differential common in US manufacturing.

That may contribute, maybe there is narrower salary gap for European companies? Also, what effect does European socialized healthcare have on corporate investment?

#82 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 23 July 2013 - 12:11 AM

For other fun facts, there are roughly twice as many vehicles owned per capita in the USA than the EU. 

 

Right, so with 4X as many people and 2X as many cars owned, that would mean we should produce 8X as many as Germany to be the same, eh?

 

Our system failed. The big three failed. The government failed (let Detroit down by not establishing higher CAFE sooner, etc.).......it's what "unregulated capitalism" looks like - unregulated and unplanned. Why design a new car with a smaller profit margin and high R&D when you can add trim packages to an SUV and put a few bucks into marketing? Then you lobby GW for a $75,000 exemption (writeoff) for SUV's. 

http://usatoday30.us...1-20-suvs_x.htm

 

Perfect! 

 

Oh, you have to add in an exemption for SUV's and pickups so they don't have to meet CAFE standards. GW was good at exemptions....the fracking fluid one is poisoning us now and will do so well into the future.



#83 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 10:47 AM

For other fun facts, there are roughly twice as many vehicles owned per capita in the USA than the EU. 

 

Right, so with 4X as many people and 2X as many cars owned, that would mean we should produce 8X as many as Germany to be the same, eh?

 

Our system failed. The big three failed. The government failed (let Detroit down by not establishing higher CAFE sooner, etc.).......it's what "unregulated capitalism" looks like - unregulated and unplanned. Why design a new car with a smaller profit margin and high R&D when you can add trim packages to an SUV and put a few bucks into marketing? Then you lobby GW for a $75,000 exemption (writeoff) for SUV's. 

http://usatoday30.us...1-20-suvs_x.htm

 

Perfect! 

 

Oh, you have to add in an exemption for SUV's and pickups so they don't have to meet CAFE standards. GW was good at exemptions....the fracking fluid one is poisoning us now and will do so well into the future.

Sure,  Detroit… Just another victim of corporate greed and George Bush. Everyone failed but Detroit’s government.

You can’t be taken seriously.

 

“Fracking fluid”, Really, where did that come from?



#84 Tom Ray

Tom Ray

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,738 posts
  • Location:Punta Gorda FL
  • Interests:~~/)/)~~

Posted 23 July 2013 - 11:15 AM

...

 

“Fracking fluid”, Really, where did that come from?

 


It flows from fracking cracks.



#85 GRUMPY

GRUMPY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,954 posts
  • Location:Balikpapan, Indonesia
  • Interests:Hobie Miracle 20

Posted 23 July 2013 - 11:44 AM

Also from cracking "facts"



#86 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 23 July 2013 - 02:16 PM

“Fracking fluid”, Really, where did that come from?

 

Another exemption.....from regulations. Just like exempting the banks from most regulations and exempting the car companies from CAFE, etc.

 

It was a libertarian paradise! The market ruled. How was the hangover?

IMHO, we will be feeling it for 20-50 years.



#87 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 02:22 PM

“Fracking fluid”, Really, where did that come from?

 

Another exemption.....from regulations. Just like exempting the banks from most regulations and exempting the car companies from CAFE, etc.

 

It was a libertarian paradise! The market ruled. How was the hangover?

IMHO, we will be feeling it for 20-50 years.

 

and business and unions from obamacare, illegal immigrants from immigration law, etc. etc. etc.



#88 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 02:41 PM

“Fracking fluid”, Really, where did that come from?

 

Another exemption.....from regulations. Just like exempting the banks from most regulations and exempting the car companies from CAFE, etc.

 

It was a libertarian paradise! The market ruled. How was the hangover?

IMHO, we will be feeling it for 20-50 years.

So your thesis is that exempting certain vehicles from CAFE standards contributed to Detroit’s demise. You can’t be serious.

Detroit is an example of what happens when a city is run by big spending liberals, race mongers, public sector unions and crooks.



#89 Monkey

Monkey

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,337 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 03:15 PM


For other fun facts, there are roughly twice as many vehicles owned per capita in the USA than the EU. 

 
Right, so with 4X as many people and 2X as many cars owned, that would mean we should produce 8X as many as Germany to be the same, eh?
 
Our system failed. The big three failed. The government failed (let Detroit down by not establishing higher CAFE sooner, etc.).......it's what "unregulated capitalism" looks like - unregulated and unplanned. Why design a new car with a smaller profit margin and high R&D when you can add trim packages to an SUV and put a few bucks into marketing? Then you lobby GW for a $75,000 exemption (writeoff) for SUV's. 
http://usatoday30.us...1-20-suvs_x.htm
 
Perfect! 
 
Oh, you have to add in an exemption for SUV's and pickups so they don't have to meet CAFE standards. GW was good at exemptions....the fracking fluid one is poisoning us now and will do so well into the future.
Ahh yes, the old gas mileage killed the city approach. Anything to avoid letting unsustainable pensions take the heat! You're looking pretty silly here.

#90 Tom Ray

Tom Ray

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,738 posts
  • Location:Punta Gorda FL
  • Interests:~~/)/)~~

Posted 23 July 2013 - 03:19 PM


 

...
 
Oh, you have to add in an exemption for SUV's and pickups so they don't have to meet CAFE standards can tow boats around. ...

 

Feexed.



#91 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 04:05 PM

 You can’t be serious.

 

Detroit is an example of what happens when a city is run by big spending liberals, race mongers, public sector unions and crooks.

 

. . . and neither can you be taken seriously. No wonder you're reduced to arguing with fools like craigiri.



#92 learningj24

learningj24

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,839 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 05:49 PM

 

 

Which is why I would never buy a new German built car.

 

Ever.....

 

But you're hunky dory with buying German-designed firearms?

 

 

Designed? Or Built? Makes quite a difference. But you know that....

 

Depends ... I suspect you have one or two German-built weapons.

 

As for the difference between design and built ... there is a difference, but not as much as you seem to suggest. My WWII-vet dad would never buy a German-designed automobile, even one built in another country, he was pissed at that particular German industry (and a few others) for support of the Nazi program. He had brought back an officer's Luger after the war as a trophy, but then threw it into the lake when he got back.

Did your dad realize that the US government paid a royalty to Mauser for the 1903 design?

Mostly out of deference to him and other relatives, I won't buy a German-built or German-designed vehicle, I don't care if it's made in Alabama, it's still a German vehicle. I love a lot of contemporary German art, literature, music beer, food, furniture, scientific instruments, optics, etc.. I have no problem with modern Germany.  I won't own a Mauser or Luger though, regardless if it was built in German, Sweden, Norway, Chile, etc., in fact I've never even held one and have no plans to get one.

 

I just thought it odd that you held some kind of grudge against Germany for their vehicles, but not their weapons.



#93 learningj24

learningj24

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,839 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 05:51 PM

...

 

“Fracking fluid”, Really, where did that come from?

 


It flows from fracking cracks. crackpots



#94 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 07:09 PM

 You can’t be serious.

 

Detroit is an example of what happens when a city is run by big spending liberals, race mongers, public sector unions and crooks.

 

. . . and neither can you be taken seriously. No wonder you're reduced to arguing with fools like craigiri.

I’m happy to argue with you… If I’m wrong, why did the big three move most of their production out of Detroit?



#95 jetboy

jetboy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 08:27 PM

For other fun facts, there are roughly twice as many vehicles owned per capita in the USA than the EU. 

 

Right, so with 4X as many people and 2X as many cars owned, that would mean we should produce 8X as many as Germany to be the same, eh?

 

Our system failed. The big three failed. The government failed (let Detroit down by not establishing higher CAFE sooner, etc.).......it's what "unregulated capitalism" looks like - unregulated and unplanned. Why design a new car with a smaller profit margin and high R&D when you can add trim packages to an SUV and put a few bucks into marketing? Then you lobby GW for a $75,000 exemption (writeoff) for SUV's. 

http://usatoday30.us...1-20-suvs_x.htm

 

Perfect! 

 

Oh, you have to add in an exemption for SUV's and pickups so they don't have to meet CAFE standards. GW was good at exemptions....the fracking fluid one is poisoning us now and will do so well into the future.

I was not aware that the economy of a nation was dependent upon it's annual production of a single good.   Now that we've determined that automobile production per capita is the key economic metric by which to judge nations, I think we should have a lot easier path to economic success!

 

2 of the big 3 failed.  I'm not sure you can say our system failed.  Without government loans VW would also have been bankrupt.  What exactly is your point here?  Do you think that Germany owns the means of production and directs product development?  Or is it maybe -just maybe - possible that a few companies bet wrong on what products to develop?  GM and Chrysler products are shit.  So are most of Germany's.  Neither are consistently producing the same quality as Japanese products.



#96 mikewof

mikewof

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,771 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 09:01 PM

Did your dad realize that the US government paid a royalty to Mauser for the 1903 design?

 

So what? It's how those weapons were used and for whom they were made that presents the problem. Ford apparently had dealings with the Nazis (despite their denial) and to this day I would rather push a Chevy than drive a Ford. I don't have anything against Ford, they make good products, I like many of them, but there is a subtle distaste for the company. Everyone has that to a degree. Some people hate Pepsi, I can't imagine having emotions about a soft drink. I'll eat Marmite if there is no Vegemite around, others would rather suck on a gorilla tit than eat Marmite, less the taste than what it represents.

Aside ... he told me that he considers both the Mausers and M1s, inferior when compared to the 1903 Springfield. Yes, a 1903 Springfield was more accurate for him than a contemporary (at the time) weapon.



#97 squirel

squirel

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 09:16 PM


 You can’t be serious.
 
Detroit is an example of what happens when a city is run by big spending liberals, race mongers, public sector unions and crooks.

 
. . . and neither can you be taken seriously. No wonder you're reduced to arguing with fools like craigiri.
I’m happy to argue with you… If I’m wrong, why did the big three move most of their production out of Detroit?

Most of their production facilities never were in Detroit. GM and Chrysler had headquarters there. GM's is the only 'sort of' headquarters still in Detroit, in the RenCen. Chrysler moved theirs 25 miles up I75 to Auburn Hills. Fords has always been in Dearborn. But square miles of land for new facilities are hard to find in Detroit. Square miles are not so hard to find in Tecumseh, Delta Township, Lake Orion, and on and on all over Southeast Michigan.

I always liked to drive up Van Dyke starting at 12 Mile with the square mile of the GM Tech Center to a huge Ford stamping plant to an equally monstrous something or other of Chrysler's. TRW had a massive presence somewhere in there. But still square mile after square mile of Big Three and their suppliers all around Detroit.

#98 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 24 July 2013 - 01:42 AM

 

 


 You can’t be serious.
 
Detroit is an example of what happens when a city is run by big spending liberals, race mongers, public sector unions and crooks.

 
. . . and neither can you be taken seriously. No wonder you're reduced to arguing with fools like craigiri.
I’m happy to argue with you… If I’m wrong, why did the big three move most of their production out of Detroit?

Most of their production facilities never were in Detroit. GM and Chrysler had headquarters there. GM's is the only 'sort of' headquarters still in Detroit, in the RenCen. Chrysler moved theirs 25 miles up I75 to Auburn Hills. Fords has always been in Dearborn. But square miles of land for new facilities are hard to find in Detroit. Square miles are not so hard to find in Tecumseh, Delta Township, Lake Orion, and on and on all over Southeast Michigan.

I always liked to drive up Van Dyke starting at 12 Mile with the square mile of the GM Tech Center to a huge Ford stamping plant to an equally monstrous something or other of Chrysler's. TRW had a massive presence somewhere in there. But still square mile after square mile of Big Three and their suppliers all around Detroit.

Not only did the big 3 move operations out of Detroit but all manner of business did as well.  2/3 of the population retreated to the suburbs.



#99 craigiri

craigiri

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,340 posts
  • Location:Home of US Sailing
  • Interests:Sailing, Innovation, Web Development, Writing, etc.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 03:07 AM

Ever hear of "white flight"? It happened in philly too.

 

As I said, now they are all lining up to move back to the city....

 

Detroit is just a couple decades behind because the industry lasted longer there than it did in Philly, NY, Providence, Boston, etc.

 

It will all be fine, Doggie. Just the world going though it's growing and changing......



#100 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,378 posts

Posted 24 July 2013 - 10:50 AM

Ever hear of "white flight"? It happened in philly too.

 

As I said, now they are all lining up to move back to the city....

 

Detroit is just a couple decades behind because the industry lasted longer there than it did in Philly, NY, Providence, Boston, etc.

 

It will all be fine, Doggie. Just the world going though it's growing and changing......

Get real...Detroit lost 2/3 of its population. Nothing remotely similar occurred in Philly (and BTW they are lining up to move back in. Philly has a modest 0.6% growth rate, it’s not all Northern Liberties) or NY or Boston.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users