Detroit: The Moral of the Story

[Valin]

National Review:

Kevin D. Williamson

6/8/12

 

The Left’s answer to the deficit: raise taxes to protect spending. The Left’s answer to the weak economy: raise taxes to enable new spending. The Left’s answer to the looming sovereign-debt crisis: raise taxes to pay off old spending. For the Left, every deficit is a revenue-side problem, not a spending-side problem, and the solution to every economic problem is more spending, necessitating more taxes. The problem with that way of looking at things is called Detroit, which looks to be running out of money in about one week. Detroit is what liberalism’s end-game looks like.

 

(Snip)

 

One lesson to learn from Detroit is that investing unions with coercive powers does not ensure future private-sector employment or the preservation of private-sector wages, despite liberal fairy tales to the contrary, nor do protectionist measures strengthen the long-term prospects of domestic firms competing in highly integrated global markets. We cannot legislate away comparative advantage or other facts of life. But the problem of unions’ coercing distortions in the private sector is at this point a relatively small one, given the decline of unionization outside of government. Organized labor being a fundamentally predatory enterprise, its attention has turned to the public sector, where there are fatter and more stable rents to be collected.

 

The second important lesson to be learned from Detroit is that there are hard limits on real tax increases, a fact that will be of more immediate significance in the national debate as our deficit and debt problems reach crisis stage. Even those of us who are relatively open to tax increases as a component of a long-term debt-reduction strategy must keep in mind that our current spending trend is putting us on an unsustainable course in which our outlays will far outpace our ability to collect taxes to pay for them, no matter where we set our theoretical tax rates. The IMF calculates that to maintain present spending trend the United States will have to nearly double (88 percent increase) all federal taxes to maintain theoretical solvency. Those tax increases are sure to have real-world effects on everything from investing to immigration. At some point, the statutory tax increases will not increase actual revenue.

 

(Snip)

[Geee]

I was born in Dearborn

[Pepper]

@Geee We still love you

[Pepper]

@Valin, The article could have been shorter:

 

Newsflash: Detroit, with Democratic mayors for half a century, is not doing well.

 

s/

[Valin]

@Valin, The article could have been shorter:

 

Newsflash: Detroit, with Democratic mayors for half a century, is not doing well.

 

s/

 

It's not just Detroit. And a question...Why has the Democratic Party dominated Detroit (and most other big cites)? Why hasn't the GOP really fought to maintain a presence in the big cities?

[Geee]

@Valin, The article could have been shorter:

 

Newsflash: Detroit, with Democratic mayors for half a century, is not doing well.

 

s/

 

It's not just Detroit. And a question...Why has the Democratic Party dominated Detroit (and most other big cites)? Why hasn't the GOP really fought to maintain a presence in the big cities?

 

I remember Jack Kemp trying to bring back the cities and thus it's occupants with enterprise zones. I think others have tried to pu thru this concept also.

 

A couple of years ago we had to take a detour and ended up in the area of Indiana where the steel mills used to be. It was frightening. You just knew if for some reason you broke down you were probably dead. Blocks and blocks of broken down buildings with window boarded and broken. People laying on the sidewalks. I couldn't believe we were in this country!!

[Geee]

@Geee We still love you

 

Thanks Pepper!!! I am smiling under my burka

[RandyM]

@Valin, The article could have been shorter:

 

Newsflash: Detroit, with Democratic mayors for half a century, is not doing well.

 

s/

 

It's not just Detroit. And a question...Why has the Democratic Party dominated Detroit (and most other big cites)? Why hasn't the GOP really fought to maintain a presence in the big cities?

 

Why?

 

Races in Detroit, MI:

 

Black alone - 586,573 (82.2%)

White alone - 55,604 (7.8%)

Hispanic - 48,679 (6.8%)

Two or more races - 12,482 (1.7%)

Asian alone - 7,436 (1.0%)

American Indian alone - 1,927 (0.3%)

Other race alone - 994 (0.1%)

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone - 82 (0.01%)

 

From citydata.com

[Valin]

@Valin, The article could have been shorter:

 

Newsflash: Detroit, with Democratic mayors for half a century, is not doing well.

 

s/

 

It's not just Detroit. And a question...Why has the Democratic Party dominated Detroit (and most other big cites)? Why hasn't the GOP really fought to maintain a presence in the big cities?

 

Why?

 

Races in Detroit, MI:

 

Black alone - 586,573 (82.2%)

White alone - 55,604 (7.8%)

Hispanic - 48,679 (6.8%)

Two or more races - 12,482 (1.7%)

Asian alone - 7,436 (1.0%)

American Indian alone - 1,927 (0.3%)

Other race alone - 994 (0.1%)

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone - 82 (0.01%)

 

From citydata.com

 

Why haven't they fought? That is a good question, lack of long term thinking comes to mind. You might ask this question to your local party leaders, and don't accept the "We don't have the money" answer, I don't buy it. A lot of money is not the answer...smart thinking + good candidates + committed people on the ground + some money = A Win....maybe not in the next election, but the one after? If nothing else you force your opponent to respond to what you are doing.

I'm an old war gamer, and if I get the other guy to respond to what I'm doing most of the time I win.

 

Race ethnicity really has little to do with it, if you present your ideas correctly.

[RandyM]

@Valin, The article could have been shorter:

 

Newsflash: Detroit, with Democratic mayors for half a century, is not doing well.

 

s/

 

It's not just Detroit. And a question...Why has the Democratic Party dominated Detroit (and most other big cites)? Why hasn't the GOP really fought to maintain a presence in the big cities?

 

Why?

 

Races in Detroit, MI:

 

Black alone - 586,573 (82.2%)

White alone - 55,604 (7.8%)

Hispanic - 48,679 (6.8%)

Two or more races - 12,482 (1.7%)

Asian alone - 7,436 (1.0%)

American Indian alone - 1,927 (0.3%)

Other race alone - 994 (0.1%)

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone - 82 (0.01%)

 

From citydata.com

 

Why haven't they fought? That is a good question, lack of long term thinking comes to mind. You might ask this question to your local party leaders, and don't accept the "We don't have the money" answer, I don't buy it. A lot of money is not the answer...smart thinking + good candidates + committed people on the ground + some money = A Win....maybe not in the next election, but the one after? If nothing else you force your opponent to respond to what you are doing.

I'm an old war gamer, and if I get the other guy to respond to what I'm doing most of the time I win.

 

Race ethnicity really has little to do with it, if you present your ideas correctly.

 

Valin, I wish that were true and in an ideal world I think it would be so. Unfortunately, in the culture of our country today, race has a lot to do with things. Blind racial devotion. The black population is so easily swayed by the likes of Obama, Holder, Sharpton, Jackson, Young, etc, etc. A good example of that is Obama's recent "revelation" that he is in favor of gay marriage. I would have expected black religious leaders (who have railed against homosexuality for decades) to take him to task over it, but other than a few insignificant whimpers, all I've heard are crickets.

[Valin]

 

Valin, I wish that were true and in an ideal world I think it would be so. Unfortunately, in the culture of our country today, race has a lot to do with things. Blind racial devotion. The black population is so easily swayed by the likes of Obama, Holder, Sharpton, Jackson, Young, etc, etc.

 

Ever ask why this is? In this case why the group that was solidly Republican left? I don't blame them, I blame the GOP, for letting it happen.

 

 

Actually I'm not talking about just targeting minorities. I'm talking targeting urban areas. And yes I understand that means attacking the Democratic Party in its strong hold. Because A. it will make cities better places to live, because it will force Democrats to not take certain groups certain areas for granted, and B. That's where the voters are concentrated. Here's the thing, Here in Mn. if you are a Democrat running for state wide office you you don't give a damn about (say) Chippewa County, or Douglas County, let the GOP have 70-75% of the vote out state, if you get the vote in the Twin Cities and inner ring Burbs....you win. I can only talk about Mn. cause that's all I know (but I'd make a small wager things are not that different in other parts of the country) in Mn. GOP state wide candidates start out in a deep hole. This hole is called The Twin Cities, Republicans here don't so much win state wide elections as the Democrats run a bad candidate and lose. The reason is they don't win in the urban areas, because they don't have much of, if any real presence.

[Geee]

Valin, I wish that were true and in an ideal world I think it would be so. Unfortunately, in the culture of our country today, race has a lot to do with things. Blind racial devotion. The black population is so easily swayed by the likes of Obama, Holder, Sharpton, Jackson, Young, etc, etc.

 

Ever ask why this is? In this case why the group that was solidly Republican left? I don't blame them, I blame the GOP, for letting it happen.

 

 

Actually I'm not talking about just targeting minorities. I'm talking targeting urban areas. And yes I understand that means attacking the Democratic Party in its strong hold. Because A. it will make cities better places to live, because it will force Democrats to not take certain groups certain areas for granted, and B. That's where the voters are concentrated. Here's the thing, Here in Mn. if you are a Democrat running for state wide office you you don't give a damn about (say) Chippewa County, or Douglas County, let the GOP have 70-75% of the vote out state, if you get the vote in the Twin Cities and inner ring Burbs....you win. I can only talk about Mn. cause that's all I know (but I'd make a small wager things are not that different in other parts of the country) in Mn. GOP state wide candidates start out in a deep hole. This hole is called The Twin Cities, Republicans here don't so much win state wide elections as the Democrats run a bad candidate and lose. The reason is they don't win in the urban areas, because they don't have much of, if any real presence.

 

Thank God for the Electoral College!