(Update) Michigan Republicans Sell Cities - Dismiss Elected Officials

[Drex]

You're also assuming heavily that increased revenue from the Michigan gov would be spent on paying down the debt and not wasted like it has been for decades on other shit, which is inane

[Senoska]

You're totally ignoring he point and you keep talking.

6 million dollars is a ton of money when most of those people are unemployed

Nope. Doesn't apply. We're talking about the state of Michigan. It is only a lot when you only look at the city of Benton Harbor. However, this city is part of a larger government.

They're also still running a $4million per year deficit, so it's growing fast. It's called prevention.

Yeah, because the governor has cut off ALL SPENDING to the city. It's not called prevention when the prevention is actively causing the issue. Derp.

The city (and state) kicked those billionaires out with a raised middle finger with some of the highest corporate tax rates in the country. Now all of a sudden they want the billionaires' money, no strings attached. You do know who gets hit the hardest by corporate taxes right? From there, it's not tough to connect the dots and figure out a long term solution to the money problem.

What are you even talking about? Are you just pulling crap out of thin air? Michigan has some of the lowest tax rates in the country. We're about in the middle in terms of corporate taxes

Michigan levies a Single Business Tax (SBT), which is a modified value-added tax (VAT). The rate is 4.95% and there is an additional modified gross receipts tax at a rate of .8%. In 2008, state-level corporate tax collections (excluding local taxes) were $177 per capita, ranking it 14th nationally.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/230.html

[Drex]

Same site has them 48th somewhere else so I don't really know anymore

Tax Foundation

Nope. Doesn't apply. We're talking about the state of Michigan. It is only a lot when you only look at the city of Benton Harbor. However, this city is part of a larger government.

Yes but the state of Michigan has been helping pay their load for a long time and the situation has only been getting worse. They already dipped into the funds that were supposed to be for pensions (to the tune of $10mil), on top of running a deficit that grows each year. And that's just one, relatively small city. You can't just wave away financial problems by saying "someone else will pay for it", when that someone else is also in trouble. They need a long-term fix to the problem, and it starts with budget cuts until more businesses can start up. Then people can get jobs, pay taxes, increase revenue, and the state will be more comfortable loaning them money again. To me, it seems INCREDIBLY irresponsible and stupid to loan more money to a city that already is bouncing checks on its interest payments.

You don't fix a city by throwing lots of money at people who have been mismanaging that money for decades. That just makes no sense. There's a lot more to be done than bailing them out with "just a few million more" or whatever. If rampant, wasteful government spending is going to be cut down, it has to start in the cities. And I'm not saying that giving money to a failing city is a waste. I'm saying giving money to a city council that hasn't used it properly in any of our lifetimes and expecting them to save a failing city is.

Unless someone can propose a solution that:

1) Fixes the problem (can't let them just veer into bankruptcy since that's unethical, and a corporate takeover would be undemocratic)
2) Doesn't give them more money from the state (state voted not to, so undemocratic)
3) Gives them more money (council voted they needed it, so undemocratic not to)
4) Doesn't put them deeper in debt (they already can't afford their interest payments, so unethical and impractical)
5) Doesn't take money from someone else unwillingly (unethical)

I don't really see the point in continuing the conversation.

[Akanei]

elect Datsyuk governor, problem solved

I'd elect Brendon Shanahan

[Senoska]

You don't fix a city by throwing lots of money at people who have been mismanaging that money for decades.

You keep saying this. What are you talking about?

[Plow]

Drex, can you name a single business that left the city of Benton Harbor in favor of another place?

[Drex]

I don't really think talking about the budget cuts is going to get us anywhere. It's reasonable to assume that since Snyder's main platform was the budget cuts, and since he was elected in a landslide in a traditionally blue state, that the state of Michigan democratically voted for the budget cuts to take place. The only question is the implementation in Benton Harbor (ie the EFMs). We already established it is constitutional (at least according to precedent), so it comes down to:

1) State votes that Benton Harbor's budget should be cut
2) Benton Harbor votes its budget should not be cut
3) Is it democratic for the state to cut Benton Harbor's budget by force? Alternately, is it democratic for Benton Harbor's vote to outweigh the vote of Michigan?
4) Same as 3 but replace democratic with ethical

If no to #3 or #4, what is the democratic and ethical alternative, bearing in mind that the majority voted to cut budgets?

[Drex]

Drex, can you name a single business that left the city of Benton Harbor in favor of another place?

Whirlpool moved their plants out but left their HQ behind
Other than that no, because everybody apparently bailed in the 60s which is way older than me. 40+ years of nothing in the city but Whirlpool and a lot of poor people.

[Plow]

That factory made parts that aren't used anymore...


In short, you're boldly presenting claims of specific behavior with absolutely no legitimate support for it whatsoever.



It sucks, because there's tons of valid points to be made here about the drivel the other side is spewing, but I'm not getting myself tied in with the bullshit you're throwing around.

[Drex]

That factory made parts that aren't used anymore...


In short, you're boldly presenting claims of specific behavior with absolutely no legitimate support for it whatsoever.



It sucks, because there's tons of valid points to be made here about the drivel the other side is spewing, but I'm not getting myself tied in with the bullshit you're throwing around.

So it's a bunch of BS that there used to be companies and work there in the 60s and there isn't anymore? Benton has like 4x the national average in unemployment and almost half the city lives in poverty. It used to be a respectable city, but 40 years ago it started turning into the slum it is today. That's not legitimate support because, what, I wasn't there to see it in person? What exactly is the bullshit I'm throwing around?

[Plow]

The city (and state) kicked those billionaires out with a raised middle finger with some of the highest corporate tax rates in the country. Now all of a sudden they want the billionaires' money, no strings attached.

This most specifically.

This is like a 2 mile wide town with barely 10k (almost entirely black) people who have quite literally been largely replaced by robots.

The only 2 major production companies that have ever been there that I'm aware of are Whirlpool, which has just slowly phased out its factories there as they became unnecessary, and Heath Co.'s amateur radio kit division that no longer exists.

It was built to be a canal town, then Whirlpool popped up, put all its good (white) jobs in St. Joe and all its shit jobs that would eventually be phased out (i.e. black people) in BH.

Clearly it's all about them "giving the finger" to the businesses, and that's exactly why across the river there's basically the exact same city except all white and it's doing just dandy.

[Drex]

This most specifically.

This is like a 2 mile wide town with barely 10k (almost entirely black) people who have quite literally been largely replaced by robots.

The only 2 major production companies that have ever been there that I'm aware of are Whirlpool, which has just slowly phased out its factories there as they became unnecessary, and Heath Co.'s amateur radio kit division that no longer exists.

It was built to be a canal town, then Whirlpool popped up, put all its good (white) jobs in St. Joe and all its shit jobs that would eventually be phased out (i.e. black people) in BH.

Clearly it's all about them "giving the finger" to the businesses, and that's exactly why across the river there's basically the exact same city except all white and it's doing just dandy.

Fair enough. I'll acknowledge I was drawing some assumptions from the mayor's quote on the issue:

“At one time we were called the Shenandoah of southwest Michigan. We had seven or eight different foundries. We had the largest outdoor fruit market in the world and we had all the retail stores downtown here in Benton Harbor. Urban renewal came in and displaced a lot of individuals and we lost our tax base. So with no tax base, you can’t run a city on property taxes alone when your residents are unemployed.” Cooke said.

and the fact that hatred for corporations is higher than ever lately.

Regardless (and shifting back to the EFM thing), why do you think it is/isn't democratic, ethical, etc.?

[Senoska]

Regardless (and shifting back to the EFM thing), why do you think it is/isn't democratic, ethical, etc.?

I would say you should probably read the thread again without your "this is a tax issue! They pushed out businesses!" glasses and you will see why this is not only undemocratic, but horribly unethical. Kuya (good lord, the day I back him...) goes into pretty decent detail explaining this to you and you sort of ignored it.

[Drex]

So the argument is that it's democratic for a small minority to decide they don't have to accept a majority ruling or plurality, as long as they voted amongst themselves that they don't have to? What's the ethical solution to a minority that refuses to follow the majority in a democracy? How hard is the majority allowed to push ethically?

[Olo401]

So the argument is that it's democratic for a small minority to decide they don't have to accept a majority ruling or plurality, as long as they voted amongst themselves that they don't have to? What's the ethical solution to a minority that refuses to follow the majority in a democracy? How hard is the majority allowed to push ethically?

I ask these same questions everytime I look at Senate Republicans.

[Senoska]

So the argument is that it's democratic for a small minority to decide they don't have to accept a majority ruling or plurality, as long as they voted amongst themselves that they don't have to? What's the ethical solution to a minority that refuses to follow the majority in a democracy? How hard is the majority allowed to push ethically?

What is the majority ruling? You're just saying words that have no meaning. There is no real world connection to anything you're saying. The majority voted in the city officials and they were dismissed. What minority and majority are you talking about?

[Drex]

The state of Michigan that voted in Snyder by a landslide on the platform of major budget cuts to Michigan cities

[Melchiah]

Stop acting like you don't understand the difference between "budget cuts to municipalities" and "termination of funding to municipalities."

[Senoska]

The state of Michigan that voted in Snyder by a landslide on the platform of major budget cuts to Michigan cities

Except this isn't at all the platform he ran on. I don't really understand how you think the majority would support this. In fact, Michigan almost universally hates Snyder and there are protests in Lansing and around the state at almost all times.

[Drex]

Except this isn't at all the platform he ran on. I don't really understand how you think the majority would support this. In fact, Michigan almost universally hates Snyder and there are protests in Lansing and around the state at almost all times.

He openly advertised the exact tax-rates he wanted in his budget, all the way back to during the primaries. He put those same numbers in the budget itself.
He openly advertised that he wanted state-funding for municipalities to be based on state metrics of efficiency and good money management. He built that into the budget. An obvious side-effect of that is that municipalities with poor money management (like Benton Harbor) get a much smaller slice of the pie than before, since they are actively being judged on their ability to manage the money they are borrowing.
And he's been talking about the importance of balancing the budget and bringing in new jobs via lower corporate taxes since the primaries. If you're running a deficit, then balancing the state budget means cutting spending. Michigan does not have a printing press. That money saved has to come from somewhere. Some of the cuts you may have a case for (like cutting education budgets), but in the case of the municipalities, he was very direct that he wanted their funding to be based on how well they manage their funds.

The problem is that the municipalities with poor money management skills (see Benton Harbor) are upset. Yes, people are primarily upset about the EFM taking the city over, I get that. The problem is that Benton Harbor made it clear it was not going to cut its spending unless someone handcuffed them and forced them to. Which brings me back to the point: what do you do when the state votes in a guy who wants to cut funding to municipalities that mismanage their funds, and those municipalities refuse?

As for protesting, loudness does not a majority make. There are tea-partiers out protesting just about everything where my parents live. A lot of these Michigan protestors are still convinced that the EFM situation is unconstitutional, so that goes to show how much they know on the matter (what the TV told them).