/Detroit

[Balta1701]

But basing people's retirement solely on something that requires both more and more people paying into the fund to keep it solvent over time, and for the organization to be still profitable and in existence at your retirement is a great thing for the country...

So lets just significantly expand social security benefits and call the safety net fixed.

[southsider2k5]

So lets just significantly expand social security benefits and call the safety net fixed.

 

In other words have some people retire on much less money, just like you were against before.

[Balta1701]

In other words have some people retire on much less money, just like you were against before.

And then all we need to do is make sure those people have no healthcare covereage, and we're set. Or at least that's what I get based on the fact that "retirement security" and "giving people health care" get treated like punchlines.

[lostfan]

But basing people's retirement solely on something that requires both more and more people paying into the fund to keep it solvent over time, and for the organization to be still profitable and in existence at your retirement is a great thing for the country...

For something on the scale of the federal government, or even state governments, this isn't really an issue because the revenue from employees is always going to be there (like how it's literally impossible for SS to ever go bankrupt).

[southsider2k5]

For something on the scale of the federal government, or even state governments, this isn't really an issue because the revenue from employees is always going to be there (like how it's literally impossible for SS to ever go bankrupt).

 

Not all pensions come from there. Also 30 years ago, would you have bet on Detroit being bankrupt?

[StrangeSox]

Not all pensions come from there. Also 30 years ago, would you have bet on Detroit being bankrupt?

1983? American cars were s*** and Chrysler had already been bailed out once.

 

You're right that a system of retirement that relies on you 1) working for the same company for 30+ years and 2) that company continuing to be profitable and exist has plenty of its own problems.

[lostfan]

Not all pensions come from there. Also 30 years ago, would you have bet on Detroit being bankrupt?

30 years ago probably not, but by 20 years ago it was pretty clear the downward spiral was irreversible.

 

I can't really understand the mentality of people who can barely contain their glee at the news that Detroit's bankrupt though, because they're the same people who pushed Detroit into the water and held its head under when they saw it off-balance by the edge of the pool.

[bmags]

30 years ago probably not, but by 20 years ago it was pretty clear the downward spiral was irreversible.

 

I can't really understand the mentality of people who can barely contain their glee at the news that Detroit's bankrupt though, because they're the same people who pushed Detroit into the water and held its head under when they saw it off-balance by the edge of the pool.

 

B/c detroit is just a metonym for 'unions' or 'democrats' or something else. It's not down and out poor people about to suffer even worse.

 

But listen. The best part about the US is how you can move to different economies and weather all in the same english-speaking country. The downside is some cities will fall and some will rise. While Detroit is falling, Minneapolis is still trucking on with a 4% unemployment rate.

[StrangeSox]

Moving costs (and I don't just mean the moving truck) aren't 0, though.

[southsider2k5]

30 years ago probably not, but by 20 years ago it was pretty clear the downward spiral was irreversible.

 

I can't really understand the mentality of people who can barely contain their glee at the news that Detroit's bankrupt though, because they're the same people who pushed Detroit into the water and held its head under when they saw it off-balance by the edge of the pool.

 

It isn't really glee as much as "I told you so".

[bmags]

Moving costs (and I don't just mean the moving truck) aren't 0, though.

 

No, they aren't, but there are costs to staying as well.

[StrangeSox]

It isn't really glee as much as "I told you so".

 

You told people that domestic manufacturing was going to collapse and leave the rust belt economically depressed for decades?

[southsider2k5]

You told people that domestic manufacturing was going to collapse and leave the rust belt economically depressed for decades?

 

In general, not specifically.

[bmags]

You told people that domestic manufacturing was going to collapse and leave the rust belt economically depressed for decades?

 

TBH, I do recall him telling me this in 1945.

[StrangeSox]

In general, not specifically.

 

What were you supposed to have told people that the collapse of Detroit now proves? Unless you're going for the "Dem policies made it collapse" point, I don't know what you're getting at. And, if that is what you're going at, I want to know what alternative you'd have pursued that would somehow have not destroyed the economic base of Detroit and cities like it.

[southsider2k5]

What were you supposed to have told people that the collapse of Detroit now proves? Unless you're going for the "Dem policies made it collapse" point, I don't know what you're getting at. And, if that is what you're going at, I want to know what alternative you'd have pursued that would somehow have not destroyed the economic base of Detroit and cities like it.

 

You still aren't understanding what I am saying. It is people in general, not me specifically.

[lostfan]

You still aren't understanding what I am saying. It is people in general, not me specifically.

Yeah not saying "you" said any of this. I'm just talking about a general theme over the course of 10 years or so of paying attention. But even given the "this was a totally Dem-inflicted catastrophe" and say the residents of Detroit did a 180 and voted for Republican leadership what would that have changed? That would've done nothing about the crippling manufacturing jobs, mistakes by the both the UAW and the management of the Big Three, the white flight (or whatever the appropriate name for that phenomenon is - people abandoning the city), the population losses and declining tax revenues, or other auto plants opening without unions in southern states that never have snow days.

[Balta1701]

Yeah not saying "you" said any of this. I'm just talking about a general theme over the course of 10 years or so of paying attention. But even given the "this was a totally Dem-inflicted catastrophe" and say the residents of Detroit did a 180 and voted for Republican leadership what would that have changed? That would've done nothing about the crippling manufacturing jobs, mistakes by the both the UAW and the management of the Big Three, the white flight (or whatever the appropriate name for that phenomenon is - people abandoning the city), the population losses and declining tax revenues, or other auto plants opening without unions in southern states that never have snow days.

To be fair, a major problem in Detroit has been political corruption as well. That's one you can blame on the political machine in that city.

[Balta1701]

You still aren't understanding what I am saying. It is people in general, not me specifically.

The real problem is that anything that makes living life possible, particularly after retirement, you despise. Pension plans, you hate, they're too expensive. Making health care available, you hate, too expensive. Good paying jobs that allow people to actually save, you hate, too expensive.

[southsider2k5]

The real problem is that anything that makes living life possible, particularly after retirement, you despise. Pension plans, you hate, they're too expensive. Making health care available, you hate, too expensive. Good paying jobs that allow people to actually save, you hate, too expensive.

 

Here's the thing. None of these things are free. They all come at a cost. When the cost becomes "can't someone else do it", then I have a problem.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Here's the thing. None of these things are free. They all come at a cost. When the cost becomes "can't someone else do it", then I have a problem.

So if there are no jobs that pay enough for people to avoid to retire, and to afford healthcare in retirement, what happens to those people?

 

They don't just vanish.

[southsider2k5]

So if there are no jobs that pay enough for people to avoid to retire, and to afford healthcare in retirement, what happens to those people?

 

They don't just vanish.

 

Here's idea #1, if you want to keep high paying jobs around, support them. Pretty much every single failed industry in the United States is a result of one of two things. #1 Technology making it obsolete. #2 People supporting cheaper versions of American industries leading to its failure. If you want American industry around, quit buying non-American stuff.

[bmags]

Here's idea #1, if you want to keep high paying jobs around, support them. Pretty much every single failed industry in the United States is a result of one of two things. #1 Technology making it obsolete. #2 People supporting cheaper versions of American industries leading to its failure. If you want American industry around, quit buying non-American stuff.

 

I find #2 rather incredible. Granted US is a huge market, but if US continued to make lateral product at higher price they would have fallen down globally and the same issues would have happened. GM has made a bunch of money back by growing in latin america. There should be a huge emerging market in Africa. You need to lower your prices to get in though.

[Balta1701]

Here's idea #1, if you want to keep high paying jobs around, support them. Pretty much every single failed industry in the United States is a result of one of two things. #1 Technology making it obsolete. #2 People supporting cheaper versions of American industries leading to its failure. If you want American industry around, quit buying non-American stuff.

This is a great concept, and it's one I try to do, but be honest...you're saying that the only way for America to have good jobs is if people make irrational economic decisions.

 

Paying too much for a product out of patriotic desire cannot be the basis for a sound economy.

[StrangeSox]

"It's American workers' own fault and not the hugely increased mobility of capital that wages are depressed and jobs are offshored or eliminated" is a pretty interesting argument that avoid addressing the shift in the distribution of the huge levels of prosperity we still collectively have. It's not as if the wealth is draining from the US, it's just that fewer and fewer people are capturing bigger and bigger portions of it, and the rest of us suffer as a result of that. It also ignores that this is cyclical--as your wages stagnate or fall, you need to find cheaper goods to purchase. Those purchases will further depress or eliminate domestic wages, which means those workers are buying cheaper things as well, and those might be the things you produce. Now your wages are depressed even further, etc.

 

The idea that we can save domestic manufacturing jobs by having large numbers of consumers socially conscious in their shopping has the same flaws as other social-consumer movements. There's far too much individual planning, information gathering, tracking, assessment, and long-term thinking for it to be a realistic method of becoming the dominate model in a given industry. There will always be US-made, environmentally friendly, socially conscious, etc. companies that can occupy niches, but they can't really become industry leaders. There's far too many forces (economical and basic psychological/cognitive) forces pushing in the opposite direction. Hell, just trying to remember what seafood is sustainably fished is a giant pain in the ass, and that's just one food source.