  Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 73 Registered: 06-2007 |
Tune In! If you're not too busy either at the Tigs game or celebrating a free day off of work tommorrow! Should be available online for perusal, so check it out and feel free to discuss here (not that you don't feel free already). | ||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 788 Registered: 11-2006 |
Socialist twadle. If it is undesirable to the people moving then they will not move. Allowing the government to coerce individuals, or worse, prevent them from moving by their own choice is socialist and will do nothing but encourage most folks to do it anyway as a form of protest. | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 83 Registered: 06-2007 |
haha, yeah, it was pretty lame. I must of zoned out about the part of the government coercing and preventing people from moving... I'll have to listen again. I thought they would have touched more on relevant issues instead of coyotes, ducks and 300 sq.ft. houses. You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the ailments of an increasingly shrinking planet though and just chalk it up to socialist sentiment. We are dealing with unprecedented scenarios in this world that won't simply be ignored. This planet ain't gettin any bigger, and the population ain't gettin any smaller. Methinks were looking for solutions, like preserving open space, blah, blah, blah, not impeding on civil liberites. Thanks for listening though and the post. I don't really recommend anyone else to go looking for it (unless you want to, i didn't see it archived yet though, i'll post it when i see it) it was relatively unremarkable. twaddle huh? hmmmmmmmmmm. Can't do it. Gotta...let it...go! Well...maybe i'll just say, if that ain't the pot calling the kettle black. Peace be with you my elitist friend. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2458 Registered: 07-2004 |
http://www.econ.wayne.edu/agoo dman/5800/week12/Improve.htm | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 85 Registered: 06-2007 |
It's not that we don't know and understand what the issues are, it's what we plan on doing about it. Thanks for the post CityLover! http://press.princeton.edu/cha pters/i8029.pdf http://info.detnews.com/histor y/story/index.cfm?id=185&categ ory=events | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2836 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Then perhaps we should eliminate the subsidies for freeway construction, FHA loans, and construction of new infrastructure that allow people to make these "choices" to live way out in the burbs. And I'm curious to know why, if sprawling development is a "choice", then why is the median home price in the District of Columbia in excess of $425,000? | ||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 315 Registered: 04-2006 |
^ I was going to say the same thing. The United States encourages sprawl. That's the way federal policies are designed. We, in the Detroit area are most aware of it because we're one of the most imbalanced. In other words, we are the slowest growing region, yet are one of the largest consumers of new land. We've heard Detroiters complaining about "nothing to do" and "can't wait to get out of Michigan" for a very long time. The more you hear people sporting this kind of language, you can be sure it's because there is a low quality of life that comes with the afforementioned two ingredients...that being no population growth, yet tremendous land development growth. What our simple minds are trained to think is that the "growth" areas are great and that we're better than everyone else, when in fact this type of "development" is destructive to the entire system. Everyone's accountable for the infrastructure left behind and everyone's accountable for the new infrastructure that is built to serve less and less people. We have the most difficulty in doing so since we're not growing. Add another layer of the poor getting poorer and you strengthen the case for wanting to leave Michigan all together. So, I beg to differ. It's not socialist at all. It's taking responsibility for the common good, and trying to at least stabilize the extreme case of segregation that has planted itself in this region, ironically since it was able to do so. Suburbs aren't bad. Sprawl is bad. Suburbs suffer a negative image problem just like the city. Every new generation of suburbs is more and more characteristic to the sprawl problem. In other words, Eastpointe is not Troy and Troy is not Green Oak Township. And Green Oak Township will be dense compared to the future x,y,z township. And me, as a city resident will help pay the burdon of extending the infrastructure just like the new residents out there will pay the burdon upon my neighbors who can not afford to pay their utility bills. | ||
Classico Member Username: Classico Post Number: 27 Registered: 12-2005 |
Damn RC. Baston has to be right about now changing his gold plated diapers. Nicely said. | ||
Rb336 Member Username: Rb336 Post Number: 420 Registered: 02-2007 |
Socialist twadle nooooo sprawl itself is socialist. we are forced to pay for your roads, your sewers, your water mains | ||
Rfban Member Username: Rfban Post Number: 113 Registered: 02-2004 |
It’s unbelievable how people just don't get it—I don't understand. Am I missing something?? The only thing worth mentioning is we have more housing stock and infrastructure than the population needs—and its been like that for a long time. CC considers that socialism? It is better economically for EVERYBODY to be aware of this, in doing so we encourage prosperity—both, collectively and individually. |
