Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#1 - soundofwinter (12/09/2013) [-]
What's the point, the place already looks like it was hit with a nuclear bomb.
User avatar #2 to #1 - civilizedwasteland (12/09/2013) [-]
Actually a lot of the locals are getting pissed because Rich dudes are buying the super cheap property and kicking them all out
#3 to #2 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
That's capitalism for you!
The rich guys knows that property is a great investment since it'll end up with a profit in nearly any occasion, and where is property cheaper than in Detroit?
#19 to #3 - devout feminist (12/09/2013) [-]
"since it'll end up with a profit in nearly any occasion"

The reason we've been in a recession since 2008 is because of the subprime mortgage crisis--caused directly by economic deregulation in the real estate market.

The only thing worse than blindly blaming capitalism for problems is blindly expecting to bring about any solution.
#21 to #19 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
Yeah, there was a collapse in the mortgage market that was a contributing factor to the broader financial crisis. But as overpopulation becomes an increasing problem in the world, so will room for people - and therefore prices on property will always rise. When they can buy property for nothing in Detroit its an even better investment. But as I said, it's one of the problems of capitalism. Cynicism.

And I couldn't agree more about your conclusion. That's why we have governments, to get them to get the system back up.
User avatar #4 to #3 - civilizedwasteland (12/09/2013) [-]
Yes but you can only push people so far, and these people have been pushed their entire lives. I wish the government would care more about its country instead of putting other ones first.
#5 to #4 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
Well, the US is the beacon of capitalism. Why? Because the people has elected capitalist governments since the foundation of the state. In a less capitalist state the state would go in and protect the interest of the people of Detroit.

Although I definitely see your point, and the electoral system of the US is too ****** up to really be able to promote change.
User avatar #6 to #5 - civilizedwasteland (12/09/2013) [-]
I respect your opinion, but disagree. I think that the lack of capitalism is what is what the government should be fixing. And I would have to say there is nothing wrong with the electoral system its lobbyist that corrupt government.
#8 to #6 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
The lack of capitalism? Capitalism promotes profits. Its more profitable to produce abroad rather than in the US, therefore these people are without jobs. They are without jobs, and as a consequence of the capitalist system they need liquidity to buy food, clothes and other necessities to apply for new jobs or survive. In the end they are forced to sell what they have to gain that liquidity, or they are forced to sell it since they have no stream of income and when the loans aren't paid the banks yet again focus on their profits. They wish to sell the security, the house, for instance, to get the little profit they can get from the individual who's in trouble.

However, since there are no jobs there, and the whole city is basically a pit of unemployment and crime (at least that's what I've heard), no one wants to live there. The prices drop.

Capitalist property purchasers looking for a long term profit moves in, and buys the houses and tosses the previous occupant out on the street and sit and wait for better times.

This situation is the embodiment of capitalism, there's full focus on profits and none on human lives or their well-being.


The US electoral system is a two party system who suppress new ideas. They favor this in many ways, among others the system with the electoral college leading to a vast amount of wasted votes - exemplified by Gore vs. Bush in 2000 (?) where Gore got the most votes, but Bush won. This system also leads to the fact that it's hard to establish new parties since you'd need to win a state to get representation in the Senate, and it's not enough if you have, let's say 30% of the votes in ALL states.
User avatar #12 to #8 - civilizedwasteland (12/09/2013) [-]
The thing with Bush and Gore is that nobody realizes that Gore wasn't really all that great and with the 9/11 attacks I think it ended up him being the better choice, which is probably what got him elected a second time (him being an incumbent is a more likely reason). His second term was an absolute nightmare however.
#14 to #12 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
Well, my point wasn't about who was best of Gore and Bush, but rather the fact that Gore got the most votes. The most people wanted him as the president. But due to the electoral system it was Bush who got elected.
User avatar #10 to #8 - civilizedwasteland (12/09/2013) [-]
I have been there, about half maybe 3/4 of the city is ghetto and maybe 1/4 of that is slum.

The main reason for the decline of jobs in Detroit is because automotive factories started moving elsewhere for several reasons. The flight of the white middle class being the largest reason, which had no economical basis it was purely because of government mismanagement in Detroit.

#11 to #10 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
Government mismanagement? I don't know what you put behind it, but I guess it made it less profitable for the middle class to live there?

My point is still that the US is the beacon of capitalism, and although capitalism often shines in all its glory and all thrive, this is the backside of the medallion. Low social protection, no protection of jobs and basically a much lower appreciation of human lives and their minimum living standard.

Looks like we've put some distance between ourselves and the topic^^
User avatar #13 to #11 - civilizedwasteland (12/09/2013) [-]
I found something that explains it way better than I ever could
www.frumforum.com/who-killed-detroit/

And low appreciation of lives I can definitely agree on. Speaking of low social issues I completely approve of free healthcare and welfare, I don't want you to think im a republican
#15 to #13 - gerfox (12/09/2013) [-]
haha, don't worry - I wouldn't mind if you were republican. All ideologies, and political parties, have their pros and cons, and although capitalism might be a bit cynic in some areas, it's really the only economic policy that has worked out really well throughout history. It resolves issues itself (and it creates temporary ones like in Detroit too though).

About the article (I didn't read it thoroughly, since my discussion with you now happens partly also because I'm procrastinating from reading to an exam and I feel bad if I read something else on an educational basis than my books). It really shows the Detroit situation in a long time perspective, I like that. However, it doesn't show why it has become even worse since the financial crisis, does it? Lack of revitalization and recovery after lost jobs? Well, its after the financial crisis it turned into what it is today.

However, I understand that those factors they mention are important - but you see, it's still capitalism even if it's technologization(I have no idea if that's a word, but I guess you get what I try to say) of the workplace or outsourcing. The heart of Detroit used to be the industry, but the heart has stopped pumping blood into the body - and its not looking like its going to restart.

I think it was Adam Smith, the father of Capitalism, who said that the government have to run whatever isn't profitable for private entrepreneurs - and I guess the health care system of the US is one of those things (it perhaps becomes too expensive because of profits). And in other countries it would have also been the responsibility of the government to reinflate the economy of Detroit again, and when its down take care of the victims of profitseekers - or maybe even protect them from them.
 Friends (0)