Here (http://www.downarchive.com/movies/documentary/113154-bbc-requiem-for-detroit-2010-a-post-industrial.html), at the bottom.
Here's a pic of someplace in Detroit to get people curious:
(http://i43.tinypic.com/20h0txj.jpg)
interesting docu. You can shoot a horror film in those large empty buildings. creepy
Do you think deindustrialisation of this scale could happen in China?
There was actually a short story in a recent Time issue that discussed a massive new Chinese housing project that hadn't experienced anywhere near the original anticipated demand. There were pictures of whole blocks of shiny new houses sitting there completely empty, and a brand-new highway completely empty of cars. It's a different root cause than what's happened to Detroit, but the result could be the same.Do you think deindustrialisation of this scale could happen in China?
Could it? Sure. Will it? Doubtful. I'm sure there are towns in China that simply stopped being useful and packed up, but I doubt they would be at the scale Detroit was.
There was actually a short story in a recent Time issue that discussed a massive new Chinese housing project that hadn't experienced anywhere near the original anticipated demand. There were pictures of whole blocks of shiny new houses sitting there completely empty, and a brand-new highway completely empty of cars. It's a different root cause than what's happened to Detroit, but the result could be the same.Do you think deindustrialisation of this scale could happen in China?
Could it? Sure. Will it? Doubtful. I'm sure there are towns in China that simply stopped being useful and packed up, but I doubt they would be at the scale Detroit was.
As for Detroit itself, there are apparently some optimistic signs. They've hired a supposedly fantastic urban planner who's essentially figuring out how to contract the city and use its land more effectively.
There was actually a short story in a recent Time issue that discussed a massive new Chinese housing project that hadn't experienced anywhere near the original anticipated demand. There were pictures of whole blocks of shiny new houses sitting there completely empty, and a brand-new highway completely empty of cars. It's a different root cause than what's happened to Detroit, but the result could be the same.
The sad part is there are people in China who are beyond what we would consider broke and they're building new cities to sit empty. We might not be the only wasteful country after all.
Did they try downscaling the project? That's the first thing a private contractor would do if demand might not meet the new supply.I think the point the article was making was that they had just about everything built before the economy dropped out. There was anticipated demand for all of these new houses, but after they were finished, no one wanted to buy them. Apparently, if China's housing bubble does a full-fledged burst, it could mean an even longer stint of misery for the global economy as a whole.
My heart goes out to anyone from Detroit. It's current state is a splendid example of leadership that was and is poorly equipped on any level to deal with the problems facing that once great city. As a side note, this is what's going to happen in a lot more cities and towns if you have some dimbulb politician, who's only real interest is in how much power they can accumulate, raise taxes on corporations so that they pay "their fair share" to get the votes of the great unwashed masses.
I've pretty much come to the conclusion that America is dead over the last few hours, it's only a matter of time before her heart stops beating and the worms burst through the surface of her rotting corpse. It doesn't matter who's right any more, you guys have won and it's done, the greatest country the world has ever seen will be little more than a memory in 10 or 20 years, and nothing can stop it.
"¡Bárbaros! Las ideas no se matan."
"Barbarians! You can't kill ideologies."
-Domingo Faustino Sarmiento (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domingo_Faustino_Sarmiento).
My heart goes out to anyone from Detroit. It's current state is a splendid example of leadership that was and is poorly equipped on any level to deal with the problems facing that once great city. As a side note, this is what's going to happen in a lot more cities and towns if you have some dimbulb politician, who's only real interest is in how much power they can accumulate, raise taxes on corporations so that they pay "their fair share" to get the votes of the great unwashed masses.
I've pretty much come to the conclusion that America is dead over the last few hours, it's only a matter of time before her heart stops beating and the worms burst through the surface of her rotting corpse. It doesn't matter who's right any more, you guys have won and it's done, the greatest country the world has ever seen will be little more than a memory in 10 or 20 years, and nothing can stop it.
I don't want people to be sick and not get the care they need when they need it.
Heh, if I thought there was someplace better I might consider it, but the whole damn planet isn't far behind. I'm not saying stone age, but a total global economic collapse is imminent. The gods damned politicians, may Satan take they're eyes, have fudged the numbers too long and too large. It's not capitalism or socialism that has failed(well, socialism did in the form of Communist USSR, but that's neither here nor there) we have failed because we put too much power in too few hands and didn't prepare well enough ahead of time to take it back and give it to other less corrupted hands. The whole system is rotted down to the local level and there's no way to clean it, the patient wouldn't survive the process.
I've come to the conclusion that the reason I'm always apart from everyone else is that I don't see things the same way.
I'm tired. Tired of all the yelling, tired of all the crying, tired of being told I'm a bad person because I don't want my country to be bankrupt and owing money to the damned Chinese or the Russians or whoever for the next 3 generations to pay for this generations unmitigated stupidity and narcissism.
None of them are bad people necessarily, but what they want and do is not what is good for the country or the people they are supposed to be leading. In the case of Ms. Pelosi, she has an 11% approval rating, her running buddy, Mr. Reid is 9%. How can they possibly claim to represent they're whole district if 89 to 91% of they constituents don't like what they're doing? But I bet they get reelected. Because better the devil you know, than the devil you don't.
No one cares about what's right or wrong any more.
*snip*
*snip*
Actually, the government today is way less corrupt than it was in the 1800s and early 20th century.
If the world is on the verge of falling apart, why is the global economy so much stronger than it's ever been? Why are standards of living up, wars down, and civil rights generally improved?
In the case of Ms. Pelosi, she has an 11% approval rating, her running buddy, Mr. Reid is 9%. How can they possibly claim to represent they're whole district if 89 to 91% of they constituents don't like what they're doing? But I bet they get reelected. Because better the devil you know, than the devil you don't.I'm assuming those approval ratings are national figures, because when it comes to her actual constituents in the CA 8th district Pelosi is actually really solid. Her positions are pretty well in line with the local majority opinions and she routinely obliterates the competition in elections by 4:1 margins. She might actually be more popular now than ever thanks to her leading role in the healthcare bill, even though it isn't what she or most San Franciscans wanted in terms of a strong public option, etc. Seems the same isn't the case for Reid, but who knows, maybe there's enough people in Nevada with pre-existing conditions who will now be able to survive until November to tip it for him :lol:
Why should he? How about to avoid hypocrisy? Obama's rhetoric is commonly about how we should all look out for one another. To call Americans selfish and greedy while bringing in 200 grand a year and not giving any money to your poverty-stricken half-brother is hypocrisy at its finest.
If I were talking about us needing to do more for each other, I would probably start with helping out my family members, no matter how distant they are, especially someone who shares a father with me.
Again, even if he wanted to do I don't think he ethically could. The President of the United States can't reach out to another country and send some money to a family member without causing a ****storm.Sure he could, ever hear of Western Union? Aslo, how would it cause a ****storm?
Again, even if he wanted to do I don't think he ethically could. The President of the United States can't reach out to another country and send some money to a family member without causing a ****storm.Sure he could, ever hear of Western Union? Aslo, how would it cause a ****storm?
Again, even if he wanted to do I don't think he ethically could. The President of the United States can't reach out to another country and send some money to a family member without causing a ****storm.Sure he could, ever hear of Western Union? Aslo, how would it cause a ****storm?
1. I don't have the means to donate money.
2. I'm not spouting rhetoric about helping others.
The minute I start saying we should do more to help others while simultaneously ignoring my half-brother (look, this is probably just me, but you should definitely be able to rely on someone who shares at least one parent with you), then you can denounce my lack of charitable giving, okay?
EDIT: It would cause a ****storm if the President donated some of his personal income to help out his half-brother who lives in a shack?
EDIT No. 2: As for wealth redistribution, check out Obamacare and its provisions on subsidies.
And GB, you say you support free markets, yet support government money being handed out to people? No offense, but those two are pretty incompatible.
*snip*
See this is where I'm confused...Liberator just expressed everything I think is wrong with the US but we've 180 opposite each other for a while.
Lib, we really want the same things...you're just letting the wrong people tell you what's best for the country. Fox isn't looking out for you. The Republican Party isn't looking out for you. In fact, you've been outright opposes to the only folks that are trying to look out for you, because some fat cat commentator told you he was a bad guy.
Right. If I were in his situation I don't think I'd be doing much for him. He's as much a stranger to me as every other guy in the area.
Spreading the wealth around is a disincentive to wealth creation.
*snip*
You talk about 'wealth creation' and the value of small businesses but the fact is that these forms of enterprise are already essentially dead, at least when compared to huge businesses and the financial elite.
I don't think that has anything to do with government handouts.
When the top 1% controls more than half the nation's wealth, I think intervention is required on some level. Some systemic change.
We've created a nice little simulacrum here of how a totally inconsequential thing becomes blown out of proportion, conflated with apocalyptic end-of-the-country rhetoric, and then made out to be a major factor in the quality of the President.
Hooray!
*snip*
You talk about 'wealth creation' and the value of small businesses but the fact is that these forms of enterprise are already essentially dead, at least when compared to huge businesses and the financial elite.
I don't think that has anything to do with government handouts.
When the top 1% controls more than half the nation's wealth, I think intervention is required on some level. Some systemic change.
So you are comparing a multi-national company that services the needs of whole countries with total employments in the tens of thousands and assets in the tens of millions or billions to "Sister Frieda's House of Cuts Hair Salon" that services the needs of a single town where it has at least 3 other competitors with employment of 8 people and assets in the tens of thousands? Further, you realize that there are only a few dozen of these megacorps and there are quite literally hundreds of thousands of the other ones right?
The flaw in your argument is that an aristocracy doesn't usually work 80 to 100 hours a week.
The flaw in your argument is that an aristocracy doesn't usually work 80 to 100 hours a week.
SpardaSon complains about the lack of compassion in America, then goes on to bash a system that's going to take care of people at the expense of a rich guy's sixth Porsche.Except that you have scaled rich down so low, that you aren't talking about some guy's 6th Porche, you are talking about affecting a person's ability to care for they're families the way they see fit. You are doing the one thing freedom loving people shouldn't, you are affecting one person's freedom in a negative way to effect another person's freedom, also in a negative way. The only fairness in a system based on "leveling the playing field" or "giving back to the poor" is the equality of misery.
And government regulations exist so they can't monopolize or drive small businesses out. And you're all arguing against those regulations.I'm not arguing against reasonable regulation, hell, most of the corporations being regulated accept the idea that they need to be regulated. But you aren't talking about regulation, you are talking about onerous, irresponsible levels of taxation that are going to affect the ability of the private sector to pull us out of this recession.
SpardaSon complains about the lack of compassion in America, then goes on to bash a system that's going to take care of people at the expense of a rich guy's sixth Porsche.Except that you have scaled rich down so low, that you aren't talking about some guy's 6th Porche, you are talking about affecting a person's ability to care for they're families the way they see fit.
Not even talking about that battuta, you've scaled down the definition of rich to $200k or below. How many people do you know that make $200k? More than a couple I'll bet. You are talking about raising the taxes of close to 60 or 70% of the population by a large margin to pay for a gimme program for 20% in what is essentially a vote buying scheme.
Also, I never said the "elite" were killing this country, it's the gods damned politicians. They're supposed to provide moral leadership as well as legal but they are providing neither.
Not even talking about that battuta, you've scaled down the definition of rich to $200k or below. How many people do you know that make $200k? More than a couple I'll bet. You are talking about raising the taxes of close to 60 or 70% of the population by a large margin to pay for a gimme program for 20% in what is essentially a vote buying scheme.
Seriously, where do you get your figures? You do not occupy the same reality as anyone else I know.
I see that the libs seem to use Fox as a scapegoat. Every time a republican disagrees it's because Fox brainwashed them.
And I'm willing to bet $$$ that Lib doesn't feel need anyone to look out for him, and that includes Fox and the GOP.
Like it or not the government is looking after you, with health and safety regulations to ensure a safe work environment, with pollution regulations to ensure we dont frak up our water and air any more (leading to drastic improvements in the quality of the environment in the US).
Like it or not the government is looking after you, with health and safety regulations to ensure a safe work environment, with pollution regulations to ensure we dont frak up our water and air any more (leading to drastic improvements in the quality of the environment in the US).
Except up until now, they haven't been acting like a deity telling us "Thou shalt drive this car." or "Thou shalt eat this food." Now they are.
That's funny, I thought you were in favor of additional government intervention in our lives. After all the arguing, how on Earth could you think that?
Or are you actually in favor of allowing gay marriage and access to abortion now? I've said all along that I support civil unions, just leave the religious thing out of it. Abortion, also, is allowable...under certain, very specific circumstances. Using it as a form of on demand birth control is both dangerous and moronic.
Also, are you just going to ignore everything said to you? Because that makes you either a moron or a troll.Why should I answer this when you have already concluded that I am a troll?
i dont know where detroit is, just that its been a ****hole my whole life
everyone sucks.
put impotence in the water.
How do you know they aren't?
Pro-business folks will try and blame the unions,
...this thread seriously went from the economic situation in Detroit...to abortion?
Well ****ing done, people. :lol:
because i have facebook friends younger than me with kids. 19 and 20 year old people with kids. They went and made more humans before they even knew if they'd be able to pay for their educations! downright irresponsible if you ask me.
because i have facebook friends younger than me with kids. 19 and 20 year old people with kids. They went and made more humans before they even knew if they'd be able to pay for their educations! downright irresponsible if you ask me.
You may whine and complain about how morals are out of date and religion is the embodiment of stupidity. But when religion and god played a larger role in peoples lives, you didn't have nearly the percentage of the population reproducing willy nilly.
because i have facebook friends younger than me with kids. 19 and 20 year old people with kids. They went and made more humans before they even knew if they'd be able to pay for their educations! downright irresponsible if you ask me.
You may whine and complain about how morals are out of date and religion is the embodiment of stupidity. But when religion and god played a larger role in peoples lives, you didn't have nearly the percentage of the population reproducing willy nilly.
Really? Because as I recall, marriage used to happen at that age or younger for most people, and if a woman didn't have kids by the time she was 20, there was a problem.
In short: bull****.
because i have facebook friends younger than me with kids. 19 and 20 year old people with kids. They went and made more humans before they even knew if they'd be able to pay for their educations! downright irresponsible if you ask me.
You may whine and complain about how morals are out of date and religion is the embodiment of stupidity. But when religion and god played a larger role in peoples lives, you didn't have nearly the percentage of the population reproducing willy nilly.
Really? Because as I recall, marriage used to happen at that age or younger for most people, and if a woman didn't have kids by the time she was 20, there was a problem.
In short: bull****.
No, because people were entering the workforce at 15 or 16 instead of 25.
snip
People here who have kids early:
a) never considered their kid's future. (universal dumb)
b) are religious, and were encouraged to have kids early, had the option of contraception removed, were never educated about contraception, couldnt get an abortion when they ****ed up and accidentally had a kid, whatever. (cultural dumb)
...this thread seriously went from the economic situation in Detroit...to abortion?
Well ****ing done, people. :lol:
All paths converge in GenDisc.
...this thread seriously went from the economic situation in Detroit...to abortion?
Well ****ing done, people. :lol:
All paths converge in GenDisc.
HEY BATTUTA
HEALTHCARE
OBAMA
IRAQ
ABORTION
Obviously it isnt black/white, and lots of factors are involved. There's infant mortality, that business with the workforce, religion, and a host of other things.You wouldn't need on-demand abortion if you didn't stick it in anything with two legs that said "sure, I'll have a snog!"
In the USA, we expect that our kids will need to be educated in order to have a good future, since all the jobs that don't require education can and probably will be outsourced (or replaced by robots). We also have access to contraception and abortion, so if we don't want to have a kid, we can just not have one.
People here who have kids early:
a) never considered their kid's future. (universal dumb)
b) are religious, and were encouraged to have kids early, had the option of contraception removed, were never educated about contraception, couldnt get an abortion when they ****ed up and accidentally had a kid, whatever. (cultural dumb)
Wow. That one takes me back. :P
Obviously it isnt black/white, and lots of factors are involved. There's infant mortality, that business with the workforce, religion, and a host of other things.You wouldn't need on-demand abortion if you didn't stick it in anything with two legs that said "sure, I'll have a snog!"
In the USA, we expect that our kids will need to be educated in order to have a good future, since all the jobs that don't require education can and probably will be outsourced (or replaced by robots). We also have access to contraception and abortion, so if we don't want to have a kid, we can just not have one.
People here who have kids early:
a) never considered their kid's future. (universal dumb)
b) are religious, and were encouraged to have kids early, had the option of contraception removed, were never educated about contraception, couldnt get an abortion when they ****ed up and accidentally had a kid, whatever. (cultural dumb)
...this thread seriously went from the economic situation in Detroit...to abortion?
Well ****ing done, people. :lol:
All paths converge in GenDisc.
HEY BATTUTA
HEALTHCARE
OBAMA
IRAQ
ABORTION
HEY NUCLEAR1
CIRCUMCISION
...this thread seriously went from the economic situation in Detroit...to abortion?
Well ****ing done, people. :lol:
All paths converge in GenDisc.
HEY BATTUTA
HEALTHCARE
OBAMA
IRAQ
ABORTION
HEY NUCLEAR1
CIRCUMCISION
ANTI-CIRCUMCISION RAGE
CONTROVERSIAL MONKEYING
SUGGESTION THAT NUCLEAR1 BE MONKEYED FOR A DAY FOR REVIVING THIS DAMN MEME AGAIN
He doesn't needs to be a brainwashed machine to be a rightist.
I think he sincerely believes what he thinks is the best for him and his country. He may be right or wrong, just like anyone else (and I have to admit he's a bit funny sometimes, like that depressive post in the last page), but the man defends his beliefs, and that is something to respect on him. Don't you think so?
[/quote
I don't think so, try watching some of the stuff coming out of Fox (I think you can stream it online), and then compare it to what liberator says. In many cases it isn't just that he's wrong, its that he has his own little fantasy world as the good general pointed out.QuoteYou may whine and complain about how morals are out of date and religion is the embodiment of stupidity. But when religion and god played a larger role in peoples lives, you didn't have nearly the percentage of the population reproducing willy nilly.
Actually we did. Depending on how far back we want to look at, 100 years ago you'd be married when you were 20, by the time you were 30 you'd have at least 5 children. I'd say that's reproducing "willy nilly". Yeah, like goat herders thousands of years ago when the life expectancy was 30 know how to live.
Each couple needs to have at least 2 kids to replace themselves, then extras for the couples that don't have any or only one to maintain they're core cultural heritage. Otherwise their native culture will be erased over time.
For an example of what he is talking about, the Native Americans got overwhelmed and their cultures driven to the point of extinction simply because the European settlers outnumbered them.
A better example would be how Europe is getting run over by immigrant cultures from the middle east.
I'm not talking about the early colonial era, I'm talking about what happened when we, the descendants of the European settlers, started kicking them off their land and shoved them onto reservations for them and their culture to wither and die. Look who outnumbers who, and look who has a culture in danger of being overwhelmed. Indian casinos certainly aren't part of their original culture.QuoteFor an example of what he is talking about, the Native Americans got overwhelmed and their cultures driven to the point of extinction simply because the European settlers outnumbered them.
You don't know anything about European colonial history do you?
Because it wasn't sheer numbers that did the Native Americans in.
I'm not talking about the early colonial era, I'm talking about what happened when we, the descendants of the European settlers, started kicking them off their land and shoved them onto reservations for them and their culture to wither and die. Look who outnumbers who, and look who has a culture in danger of being overwhelmed. Indian casinos certainly aren't part of their original culture.QuoteFor an example of what he is talking about, the Native Americans got overwhelmed and their cultures driven to the point of extinction simply because the European settlers outnumbered them.
You don't know anything about European colonial history do you?
Because it wasn't sheer numbers that did the Native Americans in.
GB, I have no clue how you thought Liberator was talking about genetics, since children frequently grow up to have a similar culture to that of their parents due to similar environment and other influences.
For an example of what he is talking about, the Native Americans got overwhelmed and their cultures driven to the point of extinction simply because the European settlers outnumbered them.
I'm not talking about the early colonial era, I'm talking about what happened when we, the descendants of the European settlers, started kicking them off their land and shoved them onto reservations for them and their culture to wither and die. Look who outnumbers who, and look who has a culture in danger of being overwhelmed. Indian casinos certainly aren't part of their original culture.QuoteFor an example of what he is talking about, the Native Americans got overwhelmed and their cultures driven to the point of extinction simply because the European settlers outnumbered them.
You don't know anything about European colonial history do you?
Because it wasn't sheer numbers that did the Native Americans in.