MSNBC’s Melissa Harris Perry: Detroit Is What Happens When Government Is Too Small

You say it's fine to argue about he size of government. She argued about the size of government and was attacked by the right. Such is politics today.

 

and rightly so...

anyone who thinks detroit would have been better off, if they had more liars cheats and thieves is just freakn moronic.

 

I disagree with what she said. I think that Detroit needs a smaller government, especially since half of its population left town.

I just don't get all of the hostility from the right. It's as if she bombed an orphanage or something.

 

Its cause shes obviously an idiot, completely incapable of any kind of critical thinking, personally, I think shes a communist stooge.

No sane human being could spew such stupidity, as if it were a fact. and yet thats exactly what she did.

[video=youtube;4ZNvC_-RW2Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZNvC_-RW2Q[/video]

[video=youtube;l704DkYuqGA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l704DkYuqGA[/video]

 

There is a reason why they have such a small viewership

 

Excellent post.

Economics between conservatives and republican are like gambling. When conservatives lose a couple of hands, they pull the chips back and wait until things look more promising, or odds are in their favor.

Democrats push more into the pot trying to make up their losses.

 

No. They are there because customers want them lol

 

It may be the case that the red states take the most "welfare" and federal "handouts" but I've never seen that broken down. If you have a site that does in fact have a breakdown of "handouts" to red states, I would appreciate it.

But as far as the topic goes, you seemed to have totally dropped it.

 

sorry, you are incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Louis#Legacy

 

The destruction of foreign industrial bases in WWII. Once they were rebuilt, the progressives in Detroit refused to adapt to changing market conditions, clinging instead to an obsolescent socialist ideology that is unsustainable and authoritarian. The US is on the same path, and it's all because of progressives. They are the worst thing to ever happen to the US.

 

Again BS! If customers wanted those items more people would be buying them. I would buy new if I could buy a plain Jane no frills basic model. It would save thousands on a newer model and more people who cannot afford a loaded vehicle would most likely too.

Maybe you don't know this but most models come fully loaded, and if you want the basic 'standard transmission' or no stereo, you are charged extra because they either have to change it out or remove it. It's actually cheaper to take the car like it is than have most of the extras removed.

 

Not sure what I dropped? Most cities are democrat because of the population that resides there. Most smaller communities tend to be republican, since they believe republican means 'religious' and/or conservative (even though that isn't the case), and both have high levels of poor. Neither is doing anything to address the situation because there is very little that can be done. Our economy is in the (*)(*)(*)(*)ter. That basically means that high paying jobs do not exist the way they did in the boom of the 1950-60's. As a result many major cities are crumbling, not just Detroit. Even if you tossed a republican into a position of power 10 years ago, it is doubtful that anything would have changed. Yes the inevitable might have drawn out a few years possibly, but it is very doubtful.

I would love to see some current figures on that as well but most date back to 2005, when Republicans had a clear cut political advantage, yet red states by some calculations, per capita, had 5 of the top ten welfare states in this country, and not much has changed in calculations made in 2010. IOW republican states suck on the government tit, just as much as blue states, and there citizens benefit more from those handouts.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/08/03/states-that-get-most-federal-money/

This insane myth that one party is more responsible, or more riotous, or more resourceful when it comes to not sucking the federal government welfare tit, is just that a myth. My comments do not praise democrats over republicans, they only point out that republicans are not much better, if they are even that. Both parties are the problem. Can I not say it any plainer for you to understand?

 

LOL You have got to be kidding me. Of course they could build a vehicle with no radio , no a/c, cloth interior, blah blah blah, but how many people WANT that? Okay, so you and a few other poors might wish to have a stripped out 4 cylinder 4 speed manual transmission vehicle, but most people do not. They want a NICE vehicle. And obviously the manufactures are going to build what sells the most.

By the way, did you know that GM DOES build a car for you? It's called the Chevy Spark

$12,200 brand new

http://money.cnn.com/gallery/autos/2013/02/06/cheapest-cars/2.html

Accounting for inflation, that is $1600 in 1965 money. Which means that GM is in fact capable of selling cars for less money than they were 40 years ago. And no one could possibly deny that even the Spark is a better car than ANYTHING GM put out in the 60s.

 

You believe that bullcrap?

I dont.

 

If I wanted a golf cart I could spend a whole lot less.

Poors? Can you be a little more condescending?

I can afford a nice car/truck, I just can't see "WASTING" so much money on junk, that has no use or isn't important to me getting from point A to point B, and don't pretend to know what I need.

I don't need a vehicle that can talk to me or tell me the temperature of my ass. I don't "need" a built in GPS, electric mirrors, motorized vents, computerized braking system/anti skid whachacallits, I know how to drive. I don't need a camera, or a danger beeper for things that are behind me because I'm too lazy to look for myself. I don't need a seat heater, electric windows, radio controls on my steering wheel, 47 cup holders, a foot activated trunk, or any of a half dozen other things that have absolutely nothing to do with driving from point A to point B. AND I am pretty sure there are numerous people out there who feel the same way I do if it meant they could save several thousand dollars on the purchase of a new car/truck. The rest of the consumer public are morons, that ooo and awww over materialistic nonsense they either do not need or cannot afford to have in the first place. Unfortunately we will never know what people want if they are never given the option to decide on their own. Will we.

 

From your link: A review of the data shows that some very large programs, including defense spending, Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, and farm subsidies, had major effects on how much money each state received, to the extent that individuals get far more per person than in other states.

So that was exactly my point.

 

No, NO, NO

Planned obsolescence.
The AMC Pacer
The Pinto
Mustang II
Monza
Cars that explode
Trucks that burn.
And others.

These are the things that opened the door to the Japanese, the Koreans, and the Germans to bring a better product to the American consumer.

Would you have rather owned a 1992 CVCC or a 1992 Metro? A 95 RAV4 or a 95 Bronco?

Our auto industry nearly destroyed itself not because of Democrats, not because of unions, because of bad management. The mistake of the political leaders of Detroit was the same as the mistake of the political leaders of the Space Coast in Florida. Placing all of their economic eggs in a single basket.

 

So defense is the only legitimate one you addressed. The others SS (if parties never paid into it), medi whatever (also over used by the poor and individuals who never or paid way less into it than they get out, and nothing says corporate welfare like farm subsidies, can I get an amen?

4.9 billion payments are automatically paid annually to property owners who are not and never been farmers, and no doubt most of that money finds it's way back into finance campaigns for the politicians who make those subsidies available. 90% of the subsidies go to less than 10% of the total farming community, and goes for the most part to the top 5 mega farming corporations, not the farmers subsidy programs were established and/or intended for, who actually could use and need the money.

So which tit is it that doesn't count when it comes to republican suckling again?

At this point I am not sure what your point is and it appears neither do you.

IOW you can't claim the moral high road if that road is built on a foundation of BS!

 

You brought up the red state/blue state federal funds issue, so if you don't know what your point was in bringing that up in this thread, why would you ask me? It's your issue. I merely pointed out that it was a stupid one and explained why, using your own links. And I can't even imagine why you arbitrarily accept Social Security and Medicare as counting as red state gravy. That's as dumb as a federal employee retiring to Texas and now his retirement pay is counted as red state welfare. Now you want to make an issue about farm subsidies. Here's my take on farm subsidies: stop them. If you feel more need to discuss them, I would suggest you start a thread about it.

I see that you don't want to talk about Detroit.

 

The discussion is about Detroit, and it is clear that it doesn't matter which party was/is in charge the inevitable was the same.

If republicans were in charge taxes would have been raised just like democrats have been doing, probably in some obscure manner so it wouldn't look like they were actually doing it (like here in Texas when the republicans lowered the taxes but increased the value of everything so on paper you were paying less of a percentage but in reality you were paying a higher annual tax), or just blatantly raising them on everybody else while they cut deals with the entities who donate to their campaign.

Or they would hire more government employees just like the democrats have been doing, again like here in Texas Perry increased government employees to lower the unemployment rate in an election year to make himself look good.

You cannot talk about Detroit without looking at the rest of the country. The theories, the failures, the stagnation is one in the same, doesn't matter which one of the corporate parties are peddling the BS. Unfortunately Detroit was the first of many to crumble, with more of the major cities to follow.

My theory is cut waste/fraud, which means no more new laws or programs until the antiquated useless laws and programs are removed and or eliminated. Revamp the tax code so it is simple and logical, period. Properly address the illegal invasion of this country with solutions to curtailing the activity, not create new loopholes and avenues that reward criminals rather than hold them responsible for their illegal activities. Eliminate the welfare dependency (for the rich as well as the poor able bodied) that is dragging the nation into total bankruptcy, and allowing competition and small business the opportunity to put America back to work.

That means eliminating the plutocracy, removing the best government corporate money can buy, and reinstating an actual republic to flourish once again. That means people have to open their damn eyes and stop this partisan bickering that is solving nothing bit creating a lot more animosity that only allows the two party scam to continue.

How many people are drawing SS who never placed a dime into it, because of the welfare reform that only removes the unemployable from welfare and places them into the SS system?

Yes, almost every dime of the farm subsidies is corporate welfare that needs to be eliminated, yesterday. Why is it that neither party is actually doing the right thing on this topic? Because this is the same BS that has destroyed Detroit, and it is bipartisan.

 

That's interesting that you think it wouldn't have mattered which party ran the city for the last 50 years, it would have still ended up the same way. So if you had run it, you still would have run it to bankruptcy?

 

Inevitably it was going to happen. Once the manufacturing bailed, all the Macky D's Taco Bells, KFC's and wallyworlds you could bring into the area isn't enough to support the money pit. We already know what democrats did, they raised taxes and created more government, which is exactly the same route republicans would have taken, only they would have offered special deals and kickbacks to chosen companies to create business while stacking that responsibility on existing businesses. That would have forced most of those businesses to close their doors, and the newer businesses to leave because they wouldn't be making the profits they were promised. Yes I believe they would have driven the city to bankruptcy eventually.

The only thing left is to accept it's death, and plan the burial. They don't have the clout or revenue to entice growth, all they can do is try to make it's death a peaceful one.

 

I profoundly disagree that Detroit's demise was inevitable. But we can't rewind history and test it. So what do you project for the United States? Do you foresee a fate that's inevitable?

 

She is the dangerous kind of socialist. Fully brainwashed. You can find her saying on YouTube that schools should brainwash children into socialism to erase parents bad teaching etc.... Scary stuff.

 

I am hopeful disagreement and deadlock can save the people from our politicians.