Wall Street got a bailout but not Detroit?

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

Cities should never use taxpayer funds to pay for private enterprises or entertainment facilities. If a sports team wants a facility, the owner of the team should raise the money himself or pay for it from franchise revenue. If the owner feels that the team needs to move to a different city due to the current one not building something for them, so be it, but the new city should not be using taxpayer money to build that new facility either. Again, the owner or the team needs to pay for it. 

Murderstyle75

As for tearing it down, Joe Louis is in a much nicer area than Tiger Stadium was. I'd imagine that riverfront property would easily be sold. As for the parking prices, yeah they suck but the Lions and Tigers aren't going to play on the same day at home very often. I paid $20 for parking 2 blocks away from Comerica Park last time I went to a Tigers game, which is pretty good.

Bailing out banks worked in saving them. Bailing out Detroid would just prolong it's agony. The city needs to completely fail, all social security, goverment jobs and administrative infrastucture needs to be wiped out and then started from scratch, without all the past obligations. That's the only way it will ever work. 

have you guys ever heard of devils night in detroit? They love to set homes on fire.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]Because putting money into a stadium benefits a lot more people than raises for fire fighters.

Especially in this case in Detroit. Mike Illich is the owner of both the Detroit Red Wings (who would be getting the new stadium) AND the Detroit Tigers. He's done more for Detroit than almost any other person. It's not like the city is completely funding the stadium, just part of it. This willn ot only house the Red Wings but bring concerts and shows to Downtown Detroit. 

Toxic-Seahorse

That is rich. A stadium does not benefit more people than firefighters or police officers. A stadium, areana or field are entertainment venues that serve x amount of people at one time and not on a daily basis. Police and firefighters serve a whole city, and in the case of Atlanta, that is over 432,000 people, every day. 

You didn't even watch the video or at least the page it was on did you? If so, you would have seen a picture of a billboard. Atlanta's city council is giving themselves a 52% raise while giving first responders only a raise of less than 5%. Then they come in and vote to use taxpayer dollars to fund a private businessman's sports venture (a new dome to replace one that is only 20 years old and still in good shape) instead of giving first responders a bigger raise. 

Will the first responders not do their job? No, but as they are some of the lowest paid in the entire Atlanta metro area, they do deserve more. They have had the blue flu in the past. Atlanta has even had to furlough days for the FD due to not enough mone in the past and that wasn't to long ago. If you cannot afford to pay your first responders better, then you cannot afford to pay for a private enterprise to build a new arena. Same for Detroit, if you are bankrupt, you cannot afford to pay for such an entity. 

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

That is rich. A stadium does not benefit more people than firefighters or police officers. A stadium, areana or field are entertainment venues that serve x amount of people at one time and not on a daily basis. Police and firefighters serve a whole city, and in the case of Atlanta, that is over 432,000 people, every day. 

WhiteKnight77

You didn't even watch the video or at least the page it was on did you? If so, you would have seen a picture of a billboard. Atlanta's city council is giving themselves a 52% raise while giving first responders only a raise of less than 5%. Then they come in and vote to use taxpayer dollars to fund a private businessman's sports venture (a new dome to replace one that is only 20 years old and still in good shape) instead of giving first responders a bigger raise. 

Will the first responders not do their job? No, but as they are some of the lowest paid in the entire Atlanta metro area, they do deserve more. They have had the blue flu in the past. Atlanta has even had to furlough days for the FD due to not enough mone in the past and that wasn't to long ago. If you cannot afford to pay your first responders better, then you cannot afford to pay for a private enterprise to build a new arena. Same for Detroit, if you are bankrupt, you cannot afford to pay for such an entity. 

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

You didn't even watch the video or at least the page it was on did you? If so, you would have seen a picture of a billboard. Atlanta's city council is giving themselves a 52% raise while giving first responders only a raise of less than 5%. Then they come in and vote to use taxpayer dollars to fund a private businessman's sports venture (a new dome to replace one that is only 20 years old and still in good shape) instead of giving first responders a bigger raise. 

Will the first responders not do their job? No, but as they are some of the lowest paid in the entire Atlanta metro area, they do deserve more. They have had the blue flu in the past. Atlanta has even had to furlough days for the FD due to not enough mone in the past and that wasn't to long ago. If you cannot afford to pay your first responders better, then you cannot afford to pay for a private enterprise to build a new arena. Same for Detroit, if you are bankrupt, you cannot afford to pay for such an entity. 

Toxic-Seahorse

In the case of Detroit, it will not make a difference due to the corrupt politicians spending the money that does nothing to help the city out. 

 

In the case of Detroit, it will not make a difference due to the corrupt politicians spending the money that does nothing to help the city out. 

WhiteKnight77

Perhaps Occupy Detroit doesn't sound as appealing.

If a city cannot manage it's finacials and ends up bankrupt, it should not get a bailout. Those residents who elected the corrupt politicians in the first place have shown that they do not care how their money is spent or where it goes. Why should someone help them? 

Does that mean that I think the banks deserved to get bailed out too? Hell no, they should have been allowed to wither on the vine. Banks have been bailed out more than once over the years and they still haven't learned. Letting banks fail might be a wake up call for those that survive or start up in the future. 

WhiteKnight77

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

 

In the case of Detroit, it will not make a difference due to the corrupt politicians spending the money that does nothing to help the city out. 

Toxic-Seahorse

Detroit should get nothing. And Wall Street should not have gotten anything either.

beause detroit looks like a sinkhole areahippiesanta

The federal government bailed out the auto industry. 

The federal government does not need to give a bunch of money to a city that overspent.  

No they shouldn't bail out Detroit. They also should have never bailed out the auto industry or the banks.AmazonTreeBoa

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

If a city cannot manage it's finacials and ends up bankrupt, it should not get a bailout. Those residents who elected the corrupt politicians in the first place have shown that they do not care how their money is spent or where it goes. Why should someone help them? 

Does that mean that I think the banks deserved to get bailed out too? Hell no, they should have been allowed to wither on the vine. Banks have been bailed out more than once over the years and they still haven't learned. Letting banks fail might be a wake up call for those that survive or start up in the future. 

Addict187

[QUOTE="AmazonTreeBoa"]No they shouldn't bail out Detroit. They also should have never bailed out the auto industry or the banks.Murderstyle75

[QUOTE="AmazonTreeBoa"]No they shouldn't bail out Detroit. They also should have never bailed out the auto industry or the banks.Murderstyle75