F2 Navigation   |  Options  |  Login  |  Register  |  Status  |  FAQ  |  Upload Pics  |  Normal Mode Bookmark and Share


Back to Index | Reply to Topic

Page: 1 2 3  | Previous  Next | First  Last

  So what do you tards think about Detroit looking to doze 25% of the area and turn it back into farmland?
.
Unregistered

Sad part is that so many people don't really understand just how fucked that city is. There are whole sections that are just a waste land. No one fucking there. I mean buildings, but no people.

Doze it, and then let the metal scavengers take what is left. Burn the rest...
ecentriceconomist
Unregistered

why do things 1/4 ass. Plow over 100% of Detroit, make it into a wild life reserve or farm.

. said:Roughly a quarter of the 139-square-mile city could go from urban to semi-rural. Near downtown, fruit trees and vegetable farms would replace neighborhoods that are an eerie landscape of empty buildings and vacant lots. Suburban commuters heading into the city center might pass through what looks like the countryside to get there. Surviving neighborhoods in the birthplace of the auto industry would become pockets in expanses of green.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100308/ap_on_bi_ge/us_downsizing_detroit

I think it's a fabulous idea. Other than the huge cost to do it, of course.

.
Unregistered

ecentriceconomist said:why do things 1/4 ass. Plow over 100% of Detroit, make it into a wild life reserve or farm.



Because it's not 100% shit, idiot.
.
Unregistered

. said:
. said:Another waste of taxpayer $$. Detroit is already a model of government programs combined with local corruption. Why should we think this new one will be any different?

Obvious answer. It won't be.


You could very well be right. The current alternative is to do nothing. And that's not working out well at all.


There's no way to attract decent people to an 85% black city.

If you're within the city limits and you have a job you'll be taxed to pay for the dead weight of all those africans.

The only way to solve that would be to shrink the city itself, and make new towns out of the abandoned areas. But even then the possibility of that huge mass of africans spreading will inhibit development.
.
Unregistered

. said:There's no way to attract decent people to an 85% black city.

If you're within the city limits and you have a job you'll be taxed to pay for the dead weight of all those africans.

The only way to solve that would be to shrink the city itself, and make new towns out of the abandoned areas. But even then the possibility of that huge mass of africans spreading will inhibit development.



Stormfront, right?
.
Unregistered

. said:Stormfront, right?


I was banned from Stormfront.
Hymie_Jaggerstein
WURLITZER PRIZE, 2010

3921 posts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4ZyuULy9zs
.
Unregistered

For the abandoned parts of the city - full steam ahead. Who are you "screwing" but the people not doing shit with their land in the first place?!
.
Unregistered

. said:The "rural" areas will just become dumps and hangouts.

Everyone ganged up on Detroit to destroy it: africans, mafia unions, federal over-regulation, the welfare state and Jewish sociologists.



homesteading is actually a great idea

what they need to do is bring in a bunch of *white trash* have them demo and rebuild everything them give the same people who revitalized the area pieces of land. it would be an excellent incentive, white people would have that nightmare straightened out in a flash. but before any work started, the homesteaders would have to chase all the africans off. white people would know better than to let the same foul creatures who fucked the land up in the first place have anything to do with the development.

:potd:
.
Unregistered

. said:homesteading is actually a great idea

what they need to do is bring in a bunch of *white trash* have them demo and rebuild everything them give the same people who revitalized the area pieces of land. it would be an excellent incentive, white people would have that nightmare straightened out in a flash. but before any work started, the homesteaders would have to chase all the africans off. white people would know better than to let the same foul creatures who fucked the land up in the first place have anything to do with the development.

:potd:



So all the settlers would get special hunting permits for all season hunting of "varmints". Negroes will be defined as "varmints" under the new law.
.
Unregistered

Great chance to give them 40 acres and a mule


gimme dat mule
\
:tyrone:


Enjoy the reparation african
\
:trev:
Johnny Rico
Unregistered

. said:So what would you propose be done?



Nuke em from space, it's the only way to be sure.
needaname
Keith Judd 2012

1827 posts

. said:There's no way to attract decent people to an 85% black city.

If you're within the city limits and you have a job you'll be taxed to pay for the dead weight of all those africans.

The only way to solve that would be to shrink the city itself, and make new towns out of the abandoned areas. But even then the possibility of that huge mass of africans spreading will inhibit development.



Aren't the property taxes there fairly heavy for what services a person gets? That seems to mean that occupiers seem fairly ready to abandon and sometimes torch their homes. The CBD isn't overcrowded, it's looks empty of people, though it's not ruinous. A city whose main train station was closed in 1987 is fairly fucked.
.
Unregistered

needaname said:Aren't the property taxes there fairly heavy for what services a person gets? That seems to mean that occupiers seem fairly ready to abandon and sometimes torch their homes. The CBD isn't overcrowded, it's looks empty of people, though it's not ruinous. A city whose main train station was closed in 1987 is fairly fucked.



I just checked the 2009 property taxes on a $66k home in the area where the story is about and they are pretty damn high, $2300 a year.
.
Unregistered

. said:I just checked the 2009 property taxes on a $66k home in the area where the story is about and they are pretty damn high, $2300 a year.



I just checked another foreclosure sale for $15k (that's right) and the 2009 taxes are $6880. I wonder if that is for a single year or if there were back taxes in that amount.

I checked another and it sold for $20k in 2008 and is under contract now for $80k and the taxes are $5000 a year. It looks like there are some flipping opportunities there.
.
Unregistered

needaname said:Aren't the property taxes there fairly heavy for what services a person gets? That seems to mean that occupiers seem fairly ready to abandon and sometimes torch their homes. The CBD isn't overcrowded, it's looks empty of people, though it's not ruinous. A city whose main train station was closed in 1987 is fairly fucked.



Yeah, it's pretty expensive - the problem is that Detroit still thinks of itself as being a big city when it really isn't any more - but it still has big city overheads despite having neither the population nor the industry to support it.

On top of this, much of the old industrial areas have variable and unknown levels of contamination from previous occupiers, so nobody wants to set up there for risk of getting saddled with the cleanup bill.

Since there is basically no industry left, the only work that remains is either services - or the sort of office work that you can do anywhere - so why do in in a decaying city with high taxes, high crime and a shortage of suitable employees (since the majority of the people who have skills left the area years ago).

Basically, you could pick a random area of empty land and decide to build a city there, and it would be in a better position than Detroit.

Page: 1 2 3  | Previous  Next | First  Last

Back to Index | Reply to Topic

 
Quick Reply
Moniker:
Message: