[johnr83]

Originally Posted by sweet life

John,
I have lived in Ann Arbor for more than 20 years and have met people here from the full range of the political spectrum - very liberal to very conservative. In general, it is a very tolerant place. The only thing I am intolerant of is people who make ridiculous generalizations like "people in that city are only allowed to think a certain way". I know you have an axe to grind over the fact that one person happened to ignore you when you were having car trouble in Ann Arbor once, but does that have to color everything you say about the place? Or, do you really believe these things you say?

I don't want this to be a thread about Ann Arbor... but I'm going to say one more thing and then I'm done

Every single person I've had the pleasure of knowing who lives in the city of Ann Arbor has acted nice to my face, and then either stopped talking to me without explanation, not invited me to important events in their life, or talked crap about me behind my back. I've never encountered such an insular community in my life. It's a lot like what I'd assume Utah or West Michigan is like. To be accepted in Ann Arbor, you have to be born into that culture. I'm much happier now in Dearborn.

The car incident is what set me over the edge.

Yes, I have an axe to grind, but it's not without reason.

[Sparrow_temp]

Democrats have stolen the language of what "progressive" actually means. Progressive means the radical left in the political spectrum now; the general public caught on to what "liberal" and "socialist" means so they became "progressives". Everybody loves progress right? That also logically infers that your conservative opponents are regressives.

Progressive ideology means taking as much money from the populous as possible to enact some liberal utopia. The reason it doesn't work in Detroit anymore is that there's no more money to take. Detroit is the logical outcome of these progressive policies. You chase away the businesses and productive members of society that contribute to the tax base and end up with the rest that don't and get a bankrupt city.

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

I doubt it really needs to be stated, but voting for Democrats doesn't automatically mean someone is 'progressive' or 'liberal'.

Progressive/liberal cities are places like San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, Boston, etc.

Detroit is probably one of the country's least progressive cities, if there was such a list.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

Democrats have stolen the language of what "progressive" actually means. Progressive means the radical left in the political spectrum now; the general public caught on to what "liberal" and "socialist" means so they became "progressives". Everybody loves progress right? That also logically infers that your conservative opponents are regressives.

Progressive ideology means taking as much money from the populous as possible to enact some liberal utopia. The reason it doesn't work in Detroit anymore is that there's no more money to take. Detroit is the logical outcome of these progressive policies. You chase away the businesses and productive members of society that contribute to the tax base and end up with the rest that don't and get a bankrupt city.

However, statism can take on both liberal and conservative aspects, though.

[ram2]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

Democrats have stolen the language of what "progressive" actually means. Progressive means the radical left in the political spectrum now; the general public caught on to what "liberal" and "socialist" means so they became "progressives". Everybody loves progress right? That also logically infers that your conservative opponents are regressives.

Progressive ideology means taking as much money from the populous as possible to enact some liberal utopia. The reason it doesn't work in Detroit anymore is that there's no more money to take. Detroit is the logical outcome of these progressive policies. You chase away the businesses and productive members of society that contribute to the tax base and end up with the rest that don't and get a bankrupt city.

The city of Detroit has had continuous Democratic mayors since at least 1961. That has done wonders for the city, wouldn't you agree?

[darstar]

So many Conservatives rant about Socialism, and how the Dems. want more of it , yet , when asked about there Social Security, well, hell no, don,t touch it ! In light of statements like this, and the race hatred, being against women and issues that have , or we thought settled years ago, well yes, I can say with truth Democrats are Progressive. They are not the party of NO. at any cost just to protect their chances in the coming elections ? . very strange ideals, but what can you expect when the right considers Rush Limbaugh the spokes person of the party ?

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by darstar

So many Conservatives rant about Socialism, and how the Dems. want more of it , yet , when asked about there Social Security, well, hell no, don,t touch it ! In light of statements like this, and the race hatred, being against women and issues that have , or we thought settled years ago, well yes, I can say with truth Democrats are Progressive. They are not the party of NO. at any cost just to protect their chances in the coming elections ? . very strange ideals, but what can you expect when the right considers Rush Limbaugh the spokes person of the party ?

Santorum might capture 5% of the women vote now.

[Luzette]

I don't understand how any woman could vote for Santorum. The man frankly scares me.

[escilade18]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

Detroit is the logical outcome of these progressive policies. You chase away the businesses and productive members of society that contribute to the tax base and end up with the rest that don't and get a bankrupt city.

Please explain how other "progressive" cities such as San Francisco or NYC aren't in the dumps. Detroit is the logical outcome of 2 things: 1. Race relations and, 2. most importantly government deregulation favoring outsourcing. Why would someone pay someone in Detroit $15 an hour to do a job while under NAFTA they could pay someone in Mexico $0.15 an hour. Be lucky that there still is a marked for blue collar labor in Detroit, it has pretty much disappeared from Pittsburgh thanks to Reagan's deregulation back in the 80's leaving a big disparity among the jobs available. The choices are: 1. Work at (name a fast food company) and make minimum wage with 0 sick days, 0 vacation days, having to beg to get above 30 hours, and a ceiling on how high you can advance without a college degree, or B. get a college degree and work as a Doctor or a Professor. I am glad to hear about the manufacturing jobs returning though, Michigan is truly a beautiful state and deserves to have its beauty truly recognized

[darstar]

Giving big industries tax brakes for moving out of the state was a bad move, at the state and federal level. What were they thinking?

[ram2]

Originally Posted by escilade18

Please explain how other "progressive" cities such as San Francisco or NYC aren't in the dumps. Detroit is the logical outcome of 2 things: 1. Race relations and, 2. most importantly government deregulation favoring outsourcing. Why would someone pay someone in Detroit $15 an hour to do a job while under NAFTA they could pay someone in Mexico $0.15 an hour. Be lucky that there still is a marked for blue collar labor in Detroit, it has pretty much disappeared from Pittsburgh thanks to Reagan's deregulation back in the 80's leaving a big disparity among the jobs available. The choices are: 1. Work at (name a fast food company) and make minimum wage with 0 sick days, 0 vacation days, having to beg to get above 30 hours, and a ceiling on how high you can advance without a college degree, or B. get a college degree and work as a Doctor or a Professor. I am glad to hear about the manufacturing jobs returning though, Michigan is truly a beautiful state and deserves to have its beauty truly recognized

How did Reagan cause job loss in Pittsburgh? US steel companies were in decline long before Reagan took office. I remember the Alaskan pipeline was built using Japanese steel because the US steel companies did not/would not make the steel needed for the pipeline. This all happened before 1981.