too broke to bury their dead

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by Little32

And this is really the bottom line (and you are not the only one who has said this in this thread, but you said it so succinctly I thought I would quote you.) When people can look at this situation and be so lacking in empathy as to label it as a deserved consequence, then we are looking at a crisis of humanity, which is far more disturbing than the economic crisis that we all are now facing.

Also, you would think that the collapse would have demonstrated the "inextricable web of mutuality" in which we all are intwined. For those who think that Detroit's collapse affects only those in Detroit, has the last year shown you nothing?

It is an unfortunate situation all around.

I don't know that anyone could seriously argue that Detroit's collapse has only affected Detroit, and I'm not sure anyone in this thread is arguing that. Anyone who has lived in an area with a car dealership knows that the effects have been far-reaching.

Again, I'm not sure anyone here is saying that the citizens of Detroit "deserve" what has happened. I look at the Detroit (and Detroit-area) citizens as, for the most part, victims in this whole thing. This all has come about because of greedy executives, union heads, and political entities, each of whom operated in a way that was doomed to fail at some point. Unfortunately, the people who are bearing the brunt of this are people who had no responsibility for the bad decisions in the first place.

It's a nasty situation.

[Little32]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

I don't know that anyone could seriously argue that Detroit's collapse has only affected Detroit, and I'm not sure anyone in this thread is arguing that. Anyone who has lived in an area with a car dealership knows that the effects have been far-reaching.

Again, I'm not sure anyone here is saying that the citizens of Detroit "deserve" what has happened. I look at the Detroit (and Detroit-area) citizens as, for the most part, victims in this whole thing. This all has come about because of greedy executives, union heads, and political entities, each of whom operated in a way that was doomed to fail at some point. Unfortunately, the people who are bearing the brunt of this are people who had no responsibility for the bad decisions in the first place.

It's a nasty situation.

But this guy did say at least this.

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Michigan is in the place they're in because they caused it. Unions ate their companies alive and with that, lost their livelihood. I feel no compassion for Michigan and hope it collapses further.

And I know that it is Elephant Walk, but I am responding to something that has been written.

[agzg]

Oh good lord. I agree - this is far too emotional a topic for people to be civil.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by agzg

Oh good lord. I agree - this is far too emotional a topic for people to be civil.

I think some discivility might be good.

[DaemonSeid]

whoa...was this cut down?


It looks like a few posts are missing...hmm

[Kevin]

Racist union guy was banned, all his posts deleted.

[KSig RC]

As an aside, Time Magazine is doing an interesting series on the decline and fall of Detroit - it's probably a worthy read for all involved, as it looks like they're doing a pretty good job.

Starts here.

And an interesting way to look at growth, from a blog post outlining the most recent unemployment figures:

In 2000 the total private sector employment in the United States was 110,798,000; by August 2009 this number had dropped to 109,540,000 -- a net loss of 1,258,000 jobs nation-wide. This is a 1.1% drop. In 2000 the number of private sector jobs in Michigan was 3,996,000; this number dropped to 3,213,000 by August 2009 -- a drop of 783,000 jobs (19.6%). This is a shocking number -- one out of five jobs in Michigan has disappeared since 2000.

Additionally, you can look at it like this: since 2000, about 60% of all job loss has been concentrated in Michigan. Of course, this ignores the large amounts of job growth that took place from 2000-2006ish around most of the country - but it's still a useful exercise. In many ways, this is a single-state depression amidst a nation-wide recession.

We can go around and around about why it happened, but that's a pretty stark number - again, though, that number happened for a reason, because of decisions that were made and trends that were ignored, mismanaged or misread. It's sad all around, and important to look at seriously and objectively, to keep it from happening in other places/industries.

[AGDee]

They have actually moved the reporter from that story to the city to live for a year while they proceed with this story. I saw an interview with him on a local "meet the press" type show that is shown on Sunday mornings here. Interesting guy.

There's an old saying.. It's a recession when your neighbor loses his job. It's a depression when you lose your job.

It is most definitely important to look at what happened to avoid it happening again elsewhere. It's an important study for economists and businessmen.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

As an aside, Time Magazine is doing an interesting series on the decline and fall of Detroit - it's probably a worthy read for all involved, as it looks like they're doing a pretty good job.

Starts here.

And an interesting way to look at growth, from a blog post outlining the most recent unemployment figures:

Additionally, you can look at it like this: since 2000, about 60% of all job loss has been concentrated in Michigan. Of course, this ignores the large amounts of job growth that took place from 2000-2006ish around most of the country - but it's still a useful exercise. In many ways, this is a single-state depression amidst a nation-wide recession.

We can go around and around about why it happened, but that's a pretty stark number - again, though, that number happened for a reason, because of decisions that were made and trends that were ignored, mismanaged or misread. It's sad all around, and important to look at seriously and objectively, to keep it from happening in other places/industries.

But can it be stopped from happening other places?

It seems to me that it would be very hard to externally impose restrictions that would protect a state or city from what happened here. (Or maybe just that if that level of restriction were imposed it might be hard for companies to be profitable.)

I certainly hope that industries or individual companies would learn from this, but we expect them to act in self-interested ways and I'm not sure the ways a region could protect itself will be all that compatible with how a company can protect itself.

For example, a region might want to make sure it wasn't almost exclusively dependent on one industry. But individual companies might seem benefit in clustering geographically. It wouldn't make that much sense to me to limit the presence of a potential employer. Sure, you could create incentives for other industries to come in, but that's probably easier said than done. Certainly, it's important to attempt it.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

But can it be stopped from happening other places?

It seems to me that it would be very hard to externally impose restrictions that would protect a state or city from what happened here. (Or maybe just that if that level of restriction were imposed it might be hard for companies to be profitable.)

I certainly hope that industries or individual companies would learn from this, but we expect them to act in self-interested ways and I'm not sure the ways a region could protect itself will be all that compatible with how a company can protect itself.

For example, a region might want to make sure it wasn't almost exclusively dependent on one industry. But individual companies might seem benefit in clustering geographically. It wouldn't make that much sense to me to limit the presence of a potential employer. Sure, you could create incentives for other industries to come in, but that's probably easier said than done. Certainly, it's important to attempt it.

This shouldn't be about "imposing restrictions" - it should be about not being idiots.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

This shouldn't be about "imposing restrictions" - it should be about not being idiots.

Well, sure. But I'm surprised you hold out so much hope that people will be able to pull that off.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Well, sure. But I'm surprised you hold out so much hope that people will be able to pull that off.

Cynicism has always been worse than pragmatism, in literally every implementation.

Look, I feel what you're saying, but there is still a lesson in Detroit - will it be learned? That's borderline irrelevant to this discussion, and certainly irrelevant for people who consider themselves smart.

[Kevin]

I'm not sure the 'all the eggs in one basket' problem is the real problem here. At the heart of the issue was a conspiracy between the unions, the companies and the state resultant from a fear of all three of saying 'no' to any of the other two which resulted in an industry which was unhealthy.

If the Big 3 had actually decided to compete with foreign automakers, if the Unions hadn't sucked their companies dry and if the state hadn't been complicit in all of that, Detroit would have probably still been a decent place to be.

This was just groupthink on a massive scale.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'm not sure the 'all the eggs in one basket' problem is the real problem here. At the heart of the issue was a conspiracy between the unions, the companies and the state resultant from a fear of all three of saying 'no' to any of the other two which resulted in an industry which was unhealthy.

If the Big 3 had actually decided to compete with foreign automakers, if the Unions hadn't sucked their companies dry and if the state hadn't been complicit in all of that, Detroit would have probably still been a decent place to be.

This was just groupthink on a massive scale.

Okay, so how do you make it preventable?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Okay, so how do you make it preventable?

Get the state to realize that ultimately, for it to succeed, businesses and wealth producing engines which produce something have to succeed. The state shouldn't get involved in propping up the various entities which hinder business, they should support business (of course at the same time, making sure business isn't out there actively hurting people or the environment).

In short, if everyone had voted Republican, Michigan wouldn't be in this mess.