After reading this scathing expose' of Wiki,
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/12/19/lawrence-solomon-wikipedia-s-climate-doctor.aspx
I will not use it for more than a lead to a reference in the future. Indeed, the research I have done on it indicates that if you are not looking for a number, it is virtually useless for anything else.
But not all were Republicans basically making them racist none the less.
So what you're saying is Blacks are responsible for Detroits downfall?
Interesting, considering Democrats are the ones who love to use the race card, as you just did. It's always about party when race is involved. At least according to Democrats.
So what you are saying is that you spoke to every person in Detroit, you saw with your own eyes and heard with your own ears how everyone who left was because of racism and not necessarily because of the policies? Are you stating that Blacks don't know how to run a city? Are you saying without Whites cities will crumble? I'm curious, why did you chose to change this into a race issue when the article was about policies? As many here said, if the fact that race was what made people leave then wouldn't this have had a similar effect on onther cities and states?
Do you have anything to say about the policies themselves or is avoiding the errors another Democrat strategy?
The irony of his ignorance is that just a few short years after his claim of republicans in Michigan being racists, they passed the civil Rights act over the objection of democrats.
And of course 100 years earlier, the republicans abolished the institution of slavery, while the democrats fought tooth and nail to preserve it. Indeed, the only registered member of the KKK that sits in congress is a democrat.
I have to hand it to Democrats, they have really, effectively twisted the race issue around in their favor over the years so that many, especially and surprisingly minorities believe don't believe the truth of it anymore. It goes to show entitlements trump history. IMO it would be like the Jews believing Nazis have their best intrest at heart today. Maybe a little strong, but you get the gist.
I would say that it just goes to show that lendrieu is the exception, and most democrats are cheap lays.
I related party to racism first but you did not waste any time to claim it was the Republicans who were the racist. But here is my curiosity. Before these "Black" people caused this "white flight" issue to happen, please tell me were there more Black people or White people in Detroit when Democrats were voted in the 1960s? Because the more I think about it the more I wonder if this happened during the 60s and if the population was mostly White and they decided to leave due to the Black polulation growing and Democrat were in the Gov't, wouldn't that make them mostly White Democrats?
So far all my research shows that Detroit was mostly White during the 60s and 70s but eventually became even or less after that. Seems to me that for at least 15 years Democrats were voted in by a population either mostly White or of a large percentage. Of course I could be wrong.
What blows me away is how he says it. As if he was fully involved, immersed in all this Black/White racism, as if he was there to see how every person who left, left because they were racist. How he somehow new that most of those White people who left during this White Flight were Republicans. I mean talk about a guy who knows all, sees all.
Makes you wonder why he left then too.
You realize he's probably out there now, shaking his head at how crazy the people in this thread are.
He is probably doing a lot of childish things. If Lucas had not already re-incarnated himself, I would swear his was now Mumblefratz.
Where's the beef?
Let's keep the personal attacks down here please. If you disagree with Mumble, attack the message, not the messenger.
Regarding White Flight:
Saying White Flight is what did Detroit in is akin to saying that a person died because their heart stopped.
It might be a generation thing but my generation and younger don't tend to have the fixation on skin pigment that the older generations seem to.
What happened in Detroit doesn't seem very mysterious or complicated. The city culture came to reward unproductive people by punishing productive people. Productive people left. Unproductive people tend to be more likely to commit crimes and productive people tend to have a low tolerance for crime.
There's a reason why most parents in the United States vote Republican (look up the exit polls if you doubt this). Anyone who has raised a child knows the importance of "tough love". It's usually people who have never had to raise a child who have all kinds of ridiculous ideas on raising children.
It's sad what has happened to Detroit. I'm glad I got the hell out of Michigan and moved back to my wife's home-state of Tennessee.
Marv
While the video does come off as blatantly byist, I do agree with some of it's points. Mainly that the UAW fucked the American auto industry and is a major reason for the fall of Detroit. But to blame it entirely on democrat mayors is over the top. Chicago has had a democratic mayor since 1931, longer then Detroit, without becoming a doughnut city.
Detroit was completely reliant on the auto industry, and when it started to decline the city took a dive. Social programs and the type didn't help any, but it's far from the sole reason for the city's demise.
Draginol never tires of orienting unions to entitlements and therefore all of whom are lazy, spoiled bastards. God forbid that anyone should want better healthcare and wages.
While I agree with your points, I also have to wonder how the UAW gained so much power to the point where they really control the auto industry at this point. The UAW funds more towards Democrats than to Republicans (Alen Specter was the only Republican to receive UAW funds but he has a D behind his name now). You are right that the city of Detroit's heartbeat was and is in the auto industry. The Democrat run state allowed for the Union to become the leech on the heartbeat. Now they have put the auto industry up on life support trying to keep it alive because their own lively hood depends so much upon it. The UAW in my opinion has basically done this to their own demise. Don't get me wrong I'm not against Unions only against Unions that have served their purpose and continue to advance their cause beyond their original purpose.
While the Mayor, state congress, national congress etc aren't directly responsible for this issue they certainly don't have clean hands. They took the money and return the favor by giving the Union more and more power slowly draining the their own lifeline. If the Auto Industry dies the death it needs to the UAW goes away. Unlike the leech that can just go to another victim they will die with it. This in simple terms DOES explain what happened to Detroit.
I'm all for that Stevendedalus, but one must also recognize there is a fine line when the Union has more control over the company than really the execs who are hired to run the company. The UAW has served it's purpose and needs to relinquish some of it's power and leeching off the dying company. My Uncle (who works for Chrysler) complained to me about being sent home and told to take a week off even though he was still getting 2/3 of his salary while being off. In most industries you go home with a severence paycheck (if you are lucky) and he essentially gets put on a type of leave where he still makes most of his salary. He is being paid by the company to not work!! Don't tell me these people are hurting like the rest of the working class. I have many friends who is only getting by on odds and ends type of jobs just to make it each month and others who aren't because they've been laid off. Many have moved back in with their parents (their whole family of 7 in one case). In the case of the UAW I have to agree with Draginol about the union. They've become spoiled fat leeches. Unions can be just as greedy as them evil corporations but because they contribute to the DNC you won't hear that from them will ya? 
if that was all it was Steven, then Unions would not have sucked their hosts dry like leaches. Once they forgot they had a symbiotic and not a parasitic relationship with the companies, they lost all sight of benefits for the workers and became just another special interests that do not give a damn about the worker, only their own power.
Exactly, when a Union becomes parisitic in the relationship it actually begins to defeat the very purpose they were created for by putting the company (in this case auto company) at risk of longevity they are actually hurting the very worker they are trying to protect.
There is simply no rational argument—you’re either for or against unions. The sucking action you heard is coming from both sides. Management wanted and got enormous productivity while willing to pay for it. The symbiosis came to an end when imbalanced trade came to our shores, and Reagan worked a deal with southern governors guaranteeing that no unions would make inroads in auto factories built by foreign companies. I do agree, however, that unions long delayed in making adjustments to the realities. It showed me that they have lost sight of priorities and why I no longer believe in unions. Instead liberals should be pushing for a viable bill of rights for labor.
Too simplistic. The essence of bargaining rights is to compromise. It worked well for sixty years in auto manufacturing until workers were being threatened by Japanese autos, yet management did nothing to face the threat. UAW, too, was lackadaisical by not insisting that manufacturers go back to the old 4 cylinder drawing boards and make a better engine for the times—in this case the 70s oil crisis.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
JoeUser Forums
Stardock Forums