  Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2320 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.20.147 |
| ||
Chitaku Member Username: Chitaku Post Number: 186 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.43.107.72 |
bumber | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1599 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.247.20 |
Bad news for Dick DeVos. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 58 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 67.63.232.195 |
How do you figure it is bad for Devos? The article clearly states that his family has had a positive impact on the area and that side of the state is doing better. Quote: •West. Counties including the cities of Muskegon, Holland, Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo are seeing modest to robust growth. A highway extension south of Grand Rapids, home of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum, has opened neighboring counties to commuters. The Grand Rapids area is attracting medical investment and professionals. "They're attractive, quality-of-life places and have a somewhat more diverse economic base," says John Austin, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and vice president of the Michigan State Board of Education. "It's close to Chicago." "Grand Rapids also benefits from the philanthropy of Amway Corporation founders Jay Van Andel and Rich DeVos. The opening of the Van Andel Institute helped launch the area's medical services boom." Funny I see no mention of Granholm anywhere... (Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 25, 2006) | ||
Paulc Member Username: Paulc Post Number: 59 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 159.53.110.143 |
"If you look at Michigan, there's really two different states here," Northrup says. "The east side has dominance by the automotive industry and the UAW (United Auto Workers). In the west part, we don't have a predominance of unions. That allows us to be flexible and innovative." I can understand the "one trick pony" argument made in terms of Eastern/SE Michigan having a predominantly auto-based economy. However, is there some over-simplification / generalizations made here about "unions" contributing to the lack of the region's flexibility / innovative abilities? I know that opinions vary on this forum in terms of the importance of unions, but are there not other factors that come into play in making a region economically viable? My question is, does unionization alone in SE Michigan hinder growth that substantially? Is their power (unions) in today's global economy a tad over-exaggerated or used as a scapegoat? Honest question - your thoughts? | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 43 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.75.220.9 |
It's a fairly balanced piece. I mean, they built stuff in Grand Rapids, and Detroit lost population. What more details could you need than that? As far as the article tells me, there's nothing happening in Detroit but the loss of population and the bumbling around of uneducated union folk. There's nothing being constructed here, and there's no expansion of automotive R&D, revitalization of downtown, and not to mention major upgrades to Detroit's medical campuses. I'm excited that Anne's Health Foods expanded on Main Street. That should have been the headliner. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 963 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 69.129.146.186 |
"uneducated union folk" this notion has been getting beat into the ground for a long time - does anyone actually have stats on the education levels of UAW members? | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 17 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
Divisive article, with not a whole lot of facts, but state opinions as facts. Much of what they say about GR they can easily say about Detroit. I would certainly call the Marriots in Downtown Detroit and Troy luxury hotels. What? We don't have lofts here too? We have a lot more retail downtown than GR does. The furnatire business has been hit very hard by globalization as well, they have lost thousands of jobs. It seems to indicate that the building of the beltline (a freeway that wasn't needed) has spurred economic development in a good way. I dunno about you but that sounds a lot like sprawl, and the foolish use of resources to me. We need to work as a city, a region, and a state to get what we want. Obviously biased crap like this means nothing, and its too bad it made it into a national paper. Just remember all of the good things we were praised for during the super bowl, we can't be as bad or as unflexible as this article states we are. They are just jelous of our good paying auto jobs while they work at Michigan's Adventure (ok baseless opinion stated as fact : )). | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 44 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.75.220.9 |
I should add that when I say "uneducated union folk" I'm saying it tongue-in-cheek, making fun of the article if anything. I have no problem with the UAW in a general sense. | ||
Ltorivia485 Member Username: Ltorivia485 Post Number: 2605 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 199.74.87.98 |
900,000? Jeez... | ||
Spidergirl Member Username: Spidergirl Post Number: 198 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 63.77.247.130 |
One Trick Pony is also a bar in GR. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 60 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.102 |
The necessity of unions: Company compelled mandatory work weeks in excess of 60 hours, and work days in excess of 10 hours (Lochner v. New York, 198 US 45). Mandatory condition of employment that a worker will not attempt to increase his bargaining position with the company through collective bargaining (Coppage v. Kansas, 236 US 1). Companies could then piggy-back off of the above-mentioned limitation on workers ability to collectively bargain to pay workers pennies for their labor, particularly women and children (Adkins v. Children's Hospital, 261 US 525) These are but a few cases of the "Lochner Era" of Supreme Court jurisprudence, whereby the Court allowed companies to unilaterally act on their enhanced bargaining position to force employment of workers at dismal pay rates. To those who argue that workers could just go to another employer, keep in mind that this Era included the time of the Great Depression. In 1937, the Court switched sides, and started to exert the dotrine of substantive due process to protect workers and consumers. This was when we saw great strides in those worker and consumer protections, and an increase in the quality of life of average workers and consumers. Sorry to go off on a tangent re: unions, but when we have a discussion of the pros and cons of unions, we must remember why they came into existence originally. Individuals simply do not have equal bargaining power as companies, particularly in bad economies. I will say, however, that I believe that many unions today are more concerned with perpetuating their own existence, rather than actually working to improve the employment conditions of their members. This is exemplified when you take into account that union budgets are driven, in large part, by union dues. With union membership falling, they need to see a corresponding increase in their dues to maintain those same budgets, and they cannot do that if their members' pay does not see a corresponding increase. You also have to take into account corrupt and/or inept leadership of many companies which leads to many Chapter 11 filings. We allow companies to pay executives millions of dollars in "retention pay" during Chapter 11 reorganizations. This is ludricous when you take into account the fact that these are typically the same executives who exhibited poor management and/or decision-making skills in the first place. So, in short, there are no "clean hands" in the debate as to who is to blame for the current economic crisis Michigan is facing. Let's just hope that, today, cooler heads will prevail and allow us all to work together to improve the entire state. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7227 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Per city-data GR has lost 1.4% of their residents from 2000-July 2004. Doesn't paint the booming picture that some want to believe about GR. They are seeing improvements but to claim it is this new place is a bit of wishful thinking. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 34 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 68.40.50.194 |
JW Marriott's are the luxury version of the regular Marriott's. At first I was baffled that Grand Rapids was getting one, but now not so much. They don't have one in Chicago or New York, but they do have one in Scottsdale and Tucson... Call me when Grand Rapids gets a Hard Rock Cafe. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1600 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.247.20 |
Because his entire campaign is based on blaming Granholm for Michigan's economic problems without offering any solutions himself. As Michigan's economy gets better and better, there will be more and more people asking him what he wants to do differently in Michigan. And since DeVos is vehemently opposed to giving voters any clue to the specifics of what he intends to do as governor, that can only be trouble for DeVos. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 528 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
I somehow feel like that 19-year-old Harvard student/author in the news lately who got caught plagiarizing (with one fewer run-on, though): Her entire campaign is based on blaming Engler for Michigan's economic problems without offering any solutions herself. As Michigan's economy gets better and better, there will be more and more people asking her what she wants to do differently in Michigan. And since Granholm is vehemently opposed to giving voters any clue to the specifics of what she did as governor, that can only be trouble for Granholm. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on April 25, 2006) | ||
Paulc Member Username: Paulc Post Number: 60 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 159.53.110.143 |
Ron - very well said and thanks for the historical perspective. Kudos as well to you Detroitplanner for some good points. Wazootyman - thanks for clarifying the "uneducated union folk" statement. I think that the overall sentiment here is that we as Michiganders - not Detroiters or citizens of Grand Rapids etc. - need to quit splitting hairs and work collectively to turn things around. Again, the lack of regionalism, present day is very troubling and telling when conversations such as this begin. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 59 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 67.63.232.195 |
Well, the Devos family has already created jobs and the article credits them with creating the current "medical services boom" in the Grand Rapids area. Clearly they have some knowledge and experience on what it takes to create jobs and improve the economy. As for blaming Granholm, do you really think that a candidate running against her is not going to discuss here dismal record? There are alot of other people blaming Granholm for her lack of action besides Devos. If you think people will read this article and think badly of Devos then you are delusional. The problem for Granholm is that not one mention of her or any of her initiatives like "Cool Cities" is mentioned in this article, mainly because they (and her) are all BS. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 941 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Yes DeVos needs to start giving specifics on his plans instead of his just saying I'm a job maker, Granholm sucks idea. He needs to start answering his e-mails to his campaign with more than, I am overwhelmed with responses, so I can't give you one. He has not answered my e-mail in a month. That and in the polls of West Michigan voters, they actually slightly favor Granholm. A lot of Grand Rapids folks, don't like how pushy The DeVos's and VanAndel's are with their money and beliefs. (I say this because my parents live in GR, and this comes from discussions with their friends). I'm not saying Granholm is a savior by any means, but DeVos is just throwing money around, which came from Scamway. They are not quiet about pushing their religious beliefs on people, and this will become more of an issue. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 530 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Why would Devos answer an email of somebody definitely in the Granholm camp? What good for him would come of that? | ||
Kgrimmwsu Member Username: Kgrimmwsu Post Number: 86 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 141.218.35.128 |
The article ignores the struggling economies in Flint, the Tri Cities, and the U.P | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 60 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 67.63.232.195 |
If you are going to base your opinion of a politician on whether they answer every email they get personally, then you will be sorely dissapointed in all of them. I have called and emailed Levin, Stabenow and Granholm and either get an automated response, nothing at all, or a statement basically saying their mind is made up on the issue and don't bother us. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1601 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.247.20 |
Livernoisyard: #1. If you think Granholm didn't offer any vision of what she would do as governor in 2002, you weren't paying attention. #2. It's not simply Bob's emails that DeVos isn't answering. It's reporters and everyone else. He hasn't given anyone any specifics about what he wants to do as governor. Face it: either DeVos doesn't know what he wants to do as governor or he doesn't want voters to know what he wants to do. Either way, it's bad for Michigan. Perfectgentleman: Of course, the challenger will always run against the incumbent's record. That's life. However, every candidate also has to be prepared to give voters some kind of specific proposals or he's going to lose the election. That's also life. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2321 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.20.147 |
Cmon, Fnemecek, this isn't your first time observing a political campaign. This is APRIL and the election is in November. It's standard operating procedure for a candidate to be very coy about the specifics of their positions on issues until much closer to the election lest they give the opposition a big head start on the negative campaign. Both DeVos and Granholm have been pretty vague about what they'd do if they win in November. It may be frustrating for the small cadre of political junkies who key into November elections in April, but it's smart politics on the part of the candidates. As time goes on they'll both get more specific. To criticize either candidate for not being detailed enough at this point is more of a complaint about a typical political campaign strategy than about an individual candidate. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 531 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Most governor races are popularity contests anyway. And within some one to three months, an opponent with little name recognition outside of the state's second largest city has been one percentage point behind a three-year encumbent. Either Granholm isn't very popular, DeVos is, or maybe both. I bet prom king and queen candidates don't answer all their email either or speak with any school "reporters" if they already know that they're opposed to their candidacies. That's life, too. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 61 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.98 |
Perfectgentleman, DeVos' family created jobs, not the son and current candidate. The VanAndel Institute spurred the medical boom, not any DeVos family member. DeVos can claim to have created jobs and spurred development, but if all you do is spend your own money building things, you're not "spurring development;" you're spending your own money to build things. And again, the candidate did not create any jobs, his Daddy did. Unless DeVos intends on spending his entire fortune building things in Michigan, he is going to have to actually develop POLICIES that spur development. Of Course, we don't know what he intends on doing since he won't tell us, but we know that Detroit is currently reaping much of the fallout from the Engler era (i.e. the closing of mental health institutions and the veto of DARTA out of mere spite are two issues that immediately come to mind). I don't know about you, but I don't want an elected official to act out of spite merely because he didn't get something he wanted. This is bad policy, corrupt governance, and reaks of the remnants of a child who got picked on quite a bit growing up. I'd be willing to bet that Dick wil be a lot like Engler, who repeatedly favored corporate interests over individuals interests, and you see what that got him, a cushy job as the head of the manufacturing lobby. I am the the belief that there must be a happy medium when crafting public policy. For instance, corporate interests must be balanced against individual interests. Currently Granholm, a Democrat who historically has favored individuals' rights, recognizes that some concessions msut be made to the business interests to make Michigan more hospitable to do business in. DeVos will never recognize that individuals need the protection of the government just as much, if not more, than business does. Therefore, we all, as individuals, WILL suffer under a DeVos administration. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 2102 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 68.230.22.99 |
Shades of the next Presidential campaign - Dems are "vehemently opposed to giving voters any clue to the specifics of what he intends to do as" president. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 62 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.98 |
"Republicans are former Democrats who have gotten robbed."  No relevance, just thought I'd throw it out there. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 942 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Ron, well said. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1602 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.247.20 |
You are partially correct. This is April so there's still time for DeVos to start telling voters what he intends to do as governor. However, you're wrong that candidates are often very coy about what they intend to do. Bill Clinton, for example, had a 20 page booklet in circulation by April 1992 about what he intended to do as President. By the following June, he had a series of position papers being distributed that were more than 150 pages in length. As a more current precedent, Keith Butler has 12 pages of material on-line that tell you what he intends to do as a U.S. Senator, should he be elected. http://butlerforsenate.com/iss ues.asp If DeVos wants to get elected, he's going to have to start talking to voters about what he wants to do as governor. (Message edited by fnemecek on April 25, 2006) | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1603 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.247.20 |
#1. Luckily, not everyone thinks like you. In fact, the majority of folks don't. Most people do actually wonder what a candidate wants to do if elected. #2. If DeVos wants to have any chance of maintaining his positition in the polls, he's going to have to start telling voters what he wants to do as governor.
It's not that DeVos isn't telling Granholm supporters what he wants to do as governor, he's not telling anyone. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1604 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 68.255.247.20 |
Quite possibly. Of course, just take a look at how well the Dems have faired in congressional and presidential races to learn how well that strategy has worked. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2322 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 12.75.20.147 |
You're right, Fnemecek, sometimes candidates get detailed early. And I'm right, sometimes getting details at this point (or even much later) is like pulling teeth. I remember hearing over and over about "a plan", "a detailed plan", "a specific detailed plan" that never got much more detailed than that in 2004. Yet other issues got more enlightening treatment. Just strategy and tactics. It looks like DeVos' campaign strategy at this point is to focus on building an image. That makes sense since most people didn't know who he was a few months ago. He may get more specific through the summer, or he may not. Successful campaigns have been run both ways. You just acted mystified as to why a candidate would not have a website full of policy talk now in April. Of course, as a voter I'd like to see detailed policy from both candidates as soon as possible, but that doesn't always happen. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4033 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.235 |
If DeVos becomes govenor will he save Detroit? HELL NO!!! | ||
Brandonz Member Username: Brandonz Post Number: 26 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 141.213.140.199 |
"A highway extension south of Grand Rapids, home of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum, has opened neighboring counties to commuters." "Grand Rapids' upswing is lifting nearby counties, too. More than half of Barry County's residents commute to Grand Rapids. This semi-rural county has 300-plus lakes and has added more than 3,000 people in five years, reaching 60,000." Sprawl, anyone? And Grand Rapids and Ann Arbor continue to lose population and face budgetary crises (part of this population drop is likely due to demographic shifts, however). This state, all of it, is in trouble... and much of the blame can be put on Lansing's complete inability to "get it." Tax breaks for manufacturers, more highways, home-rule townships, and draconian regulation of local taxing authority ain't gonna save us. Ugh. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 61 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 67.63.232.195 |
Ron, Well, Dick Devos didn't start Amway, he is the son of the founder, so I guess those on the left should quit trying to blame him for the "Amway Pyramid Scam" they keep talking about by your logic. There is another word for your term of "spending your own money and building things." It’s called "investment." Risking your own capital to benefit yourself and the greater good is how this nation was built. Are you really saying it is bad that the Devos family has done that? Do you not realize it gives them the perspective of someone who has built something and made it work that would allow them to create an environment to stimulate others to do so? What policies has Granholm enacted as governor or prior to that would lead you to think she has a clue about attracting business to Michigan to diversify our economy? If you think that the main reason for Detroit’s woes is DARTA and the lack of mental institutions you are misguided. Apparently you bought Kwame’s line in the state of the city address where he implied that most of the crimes in Detroit were being committed by mentally ill people. That is an insult to the mentally ill! This notion that Engler did that out of “spite” is idiotic. Then your drug store psychology about him “being picked on” as a child. Once again those on the left give Jennifer a pass for her record, but blame her predecessor for all of our problems. So it is OK for you to blame a governor who left office 4 years ago for the current situation, but Devos should refrain from mentioning Granholm’s record? You go on to say that Dick Devos would be like Engler, yet criticize him because he “won’t tell us what he is going to do.” Which is it? Is he an Engler clone or a complete unknown? It is not in anyone’s “individual interest” to be out of work. Granholm will not pay your bills, only a job can do that. She has made no “concessions” to business or anyone else that I can see. It seems to me that the institution we need to be “protected” from is the government itself. A fine example of this is Granholm complaining about high gas prices and asking everyone to sign an online petition addressed to George Bush, yet the state government makes more money off of a gallon of gas than Exxon does. Does she want to reduce the 20 cent tax imposed by the state? Of course not. Her grandstanding once again leads nowhere. (Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 25, 2006) | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 537 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Don't forget the 6% sales tax on top of the gas cost, fed gas tax, and state gas tax. Approximately another 16 cents per gallon. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 62 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 67.63.232.195 |
Livernoisyard You are right, I forgot about that. So thats 36 cents in State tax alone, the total with the national gas tax is double that. As the price spikes further, the government coffers get the "windfall" and the politicians on the left who have restricted oil exploration, made it next to impossible to build refineries in the US, and demand dozens of different mixes of gas to be produced, blame George Bush. Not that I love Big Oil, but Granholm's pandering is pathetic. (Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 25, 2006) | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 943 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
The gas taxes are based on a per gallon amount, so government is not benefitting from the higher prices. I must agree with PerfectGentleman on a couple things. First, Granholm's petition is useless. The only way to fix this gas problem is to use less gas period. Government intervention into the oil industry will just lead to the problems we had in the 1970s. Now back to DeVos, lot of what a lot of us said is due to the fact we do not know Dick DeVos Jr. He may be a John Engler clone, he may not. He refuses to give out his tax information, which most politicians, including Granholm, Bush and Cheney have all done. He may be the greatest guy on earth and the best thing for this state, but by not showing us it gives the impression he is covering something up. We don't know him, and he is not helping anything. We can go by statement his wife and father have given, which frankly scare me. I applaud them for giving money to great causes, but I disagree with how they then interject their religious beliefs into it. That is great for the positions they are in, but Dick Jr. is going to have to assure us that as a governor of this state he will be fair and listen to everyone, and not push his personal religious agenda like his father does. I could be completely wrong, but DeVos JR is not giving us any answers on anything. This is causing lots of people to take what they know about his family and wife and put that into what Dick Jr will be like as governor. Maybe we will find out more on Friday when he is in Detroit at Cobo. When you are trying to run against an incumbant, you need to let us know why you are better, John Kerry ran on the Bush sucks, vote for me, but never really gave us answers, so he did not get elected and we have W again. It's not that he was great, but he at least told us what he stands for. DeVos so far is following the path of Kerry and say I am not Granholm, I am a job creator. Wonderful, but although we need jobs in this state, we also need to know more about how you will run other aspects of this state, and so far, we are all getting the silent treatment. Maybe DeVos will wait and tell us in a little bit what he will do, but right now, not much. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 65 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 71.227.26.9 |
Bob - I respect your opinion and your response, I think we will all learn more as the election draws near, maybe in the debates. I agree with what you say about the amount per gallon on the gas tax, although there is still additional revenue coming in due to increased demand at this time of year. I agree we should use less gas, until we can get alternative fuels online. I am all for a 4-day 10 hour per day work week and telecommuting for many office jobs. If corporate America can off-shore jobs to India they can deal with people working at home. That would save a decent amount of fuel right there. Carpooling is cool but hard to pull off sometimes. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 538 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
There is a Michigan sales tax on top of the gas cost plus federal and state gas taxes. gas price watch Gasoline Tax Rates by State Note: The Federal Gas Tax is 18.4 cpg Michigan Gas Tax: 19 cpg Note: Plus 6% sales tax and 0.875 cpg for environmental regulation fee for refined petroleum fund. Editorial: Stop the panic over higher gasoline prices Tuesday, April 25, 2006 Governor chooses empty gestures over helping motorists Gov. Jennifer Granholm can't have it both ways -- she complains about windfall profits on gasoline but gladly accepts the windfall sales taxes the state is getting from Michigan motorists. She and other lawmakers should stop the panicky election-year sloganeering. Fuel prices rise and fall according to supply and demand. There's not a shred of evidence that price increases reflect anything other than that age-old dynamic. But if state lawmakers want to give Michigan motorists a break, they have the power to do so by suspending, modifying or eliminating the state sales tax on gasoline. We're generally not in favor of tinkering with taxes in reaction to commodity prices because the chase becomes an endless game. But if lawmakers are worried, they have options beyond petitioning Washington, a tinker-toy scheme proposed by the governor. State Rep. Robert Gosselin, R-Troy, says Granholm's view on the gas price increase is "not a free enterprise perspective." "In other words, it's a socialistic control mechanism," he says. "We can't do anything about that around the country. But what we can do is deal with sales tax. The state is getting a windfall on the backs of drivers." The lawmaker cites estimates that the sales tax sucks an extra $30 million from motorists every time the price of fuel goes up 10 cents. That's money Michigan families could use in the current economic downturn. Gosselin and others have ideas on reducing the tax burden, some worthwhile, some not. But the point is that at least Gosselin is offering concrete suggestions, unlike the governor's Chicken-Little wails of woe. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on April 25, 2006) | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 23 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
technically part of the gas taxes are based on cost, and that is the six percent general sales tax. at $1.50 this generates nine cents, at $3.00 it generates eighteen cents per gallon. Non of the sales tax goes to covering the cost of transportation. It goes for general government and schools. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 67 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 71.227.26.9 |
Livernoisyard / Detroitplanner - Good points on this, the sales tax is a percentage of the selling price which would go up along with the price. In theory this helps Jen balance the state budget, maybe she can brag on that and just leave out the detail of where the extra money came from.... | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 64 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.105 |
Perfectgentleman, You are correct about DeVos not being the founder; therefore he cannot lay any claim to being a "job creator." However, he consistently attempts to sell himself as such, hence the "blame" that is laid at his feet for creating "Scamway." He is, in fact, the one trying to have it both ways, by claiming Amway's successes as his own, and denying it's criticisms. I think investment, personal or otherwise, is a great thing, and not to be discounted. I just do not know what his personal investment in GR, or any other place, has reaped in terms of "spurring development." If you know something about what his personal investment has helped to create, please let me know. (Believe it or not, I am somewhat open-minded, as I consider myself a moderate Democrat). But again, most of the investment done has been by his family and the VanAndel family, not Dick personally (to my knowledge). What I do know is that all Republican Governors in recent history, aside from Gov. Milliken I believe (or is it Romney, please correct me if I'm wrong), has ignored the issues that we face in the city of Detroit. The two issues I mentioned were not to exemplify the only actions that Engler took as Gov. that hurt Detroit, they were the two "that c[a]me to mind." With regards to DARTA, he did, in fact, veto it because the caps on Charter Schools were not raised. It was a tit-for-tat response to the actions of the Dems to block any such increase. Frankly, it is idiotic of you to deny this! That does sound to me like someone who was bullied as a child, and now has a little power to throw around. Discount it as dime-store psychology (no pun intended), or what have you, it is still accurate. With regards to the mental health institutions, he knew that he could make those cuts, to find money for tax cuts, and that his supporters would never have see the repurcussions of those cuts because all of the released patients would end up in Detroit, certainly not Bloomfield Hills, or St. Joe, or any other well-off community. What I do give Granholm credit for is that she has been able to minimize the damage to Michigan. There is no doubt that we are in crucial economic times, and what she has done is still carry on a semblance of a functioning Government, with far less revenue due, in large part, to the tax cuts by the GOP in the 90's when times were good. If the GOP really cared about individual rights, as they often claim to (or rather, they argue for individual responsibility; come on, what's wrong with you if you can't "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps") then would they have totally abrogated pharmaceutical companies' liability for intentionally lying and covering up studies that show a definite link to heart disease in Vioxx patients? And of course, we have NOT realized any reduction in the PRICE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, we just have intentional acts that are killing people. It is also typical GOP propoganda to say that we need protection from the government. It is effective propoganda because there is some semblance of truth there, as we can all point to certain acts of government that we disagree with. However, as I pointed out (I believe in another thread), the government more often than not protects property more than life, so those with more should pay more. PS, we actually do agree on the Granholm gas issue. She is probably trying to build a database of voters whom care about this issue. This is politics, not policy. Finally, with respect to the issue of the DeVos' and vanAndel's, and others of that ilk, who wish to co-mingle religion/faith and politics/government. I am a Christian man, who considers himself to be in the charismatic or fundamentalist type of Christianity. However, I fear it when we try to: (1) legislate our morality on others, and (2) craft policy based upon religous principles rather than sound analytic principles. These practices scare me because (1) there is no guarantee that Christians will always be in power, and I do not want anyone telling me I have to fast during Ramadan; and (2) what goes one way can certainly go another. For instance, if we allow religion to say that "intelligent design" must be taught in schools, and this practice is upheld by the Courts, then there is nothing to stop that same precedent from being used to mandate that evolution must be taught in Church. We are on a slippery slope with respect to the co-mingling of religion and politics, and once we go down it, it is not very easy to get back up if we see that the the hill is a lot taller than we thought. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 72 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 71.227.26.9 |
Ron - Please understand I am no apologist for the GOP or large conglomerates like the big pharmaceuticals. I am a conservative who believes in capitalism combined with morality and concern for the republic in mind. Capitalism without the other 2 attributes I mentioned can be very damaging. Both parties pander to special interests, and many large corporations are run by liberals who invest in left-wing causes. Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, American Express, and Ford to name a few, although I could name dozens of others. This notion that conservatives are beholden to and “run” big business is as obsolete as the notion that all Republicans are conservatives. I also believe in the separation of church and state, as does DeVos I’m sure. He won’t be instituting a state religion nor will his views have much impact on issues like abortion or school prayer. Intelligent design is just another point of view that is not necessarily a Christian belief that should not be feared, but debated openly. Many scientists have jumped on the ID bandwagon as well. That said, nothing DeVos does will probably impact that either. Granholm doesn't hesitate to haul out her Catholic credentials when it suits her. The relentless pandering at the church when she was eulogizing Rosa Parks was pathetic and embarrassing. Of course she and her buddy Bill Clinton immediately left when they were done talking and didn’t stay to the end, leaving the family to stand alone. Of course the cameras were gone so no reason to hang around I guess. My main hope for DeVos is that he can improve the business climate in this state to enable us to diversify the economy. Clearly he has some knowledge of that based on his background with his family and the Van Andels. If nothing else, he would end the gridlock between the governor and the state house. At least action could be taken on something, and we could get off the starting line. If we repealed the SBT and reformed the inventory tax on business that would be a beginning. Neither of those seems likely with all the partisan bickering going on. Maybe the SBT will be on the ballot and the voters get rid of if that way. I don't really see how Granholm has really done much, her proposals are weak and she mainly just blames Republicans for her failures. Why would a second term be any different? She shows up for photo ops at companies hiring a few dozen people and takes credit for it and she seems to come off OK as a speaker on TV. Beyond that, I haven't heard anything remotely interesting from her. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 66 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.100 |
Perfectgentleman, I agree that something must be done to break the gridlock in Lansing. I would prefer Democratic control of the Legislature, though, rather than GOP control of the Governorship. With respect to the GOP policies being better in creating a conducive environment to do business in, I simply doubt that the policies being espoused would create sufficient development to offset it's costs. This belief was confirmed by the Chief of the Citizens Research Council, a well-regarded economist, indicating that any new development created by the abolition of the SBT would not offset it's costs. (I can't remember his name, but he appeared on "Off the Record" a few weeks ago) I do agree that something must be done to diversify Michigan's economy. My biggest problem is that no one individual, party, or interest gorup has all of the answers, yet we all think that we do. That fact, coupled with the sad reality of partisan politics, makes any meaningful progress very difficult. Despite my opening paragraph, I find it dangerous for either party to have absolute control over government, as it allows abuse and corruption. (We've all heard the admonition about absolute power). Despite the wide-spread belief that GOP policies are better for the economy, I believe that the natural give and take of alternating economic policy initiatives (as implemented by alternating partisan officals) probably allows the US economy to rebound fairly quickly during it's natural ebbs. To paraphrase Kenny Rogers, there's a time when to hold 'em, and a time to fold 'em, just as there is a time to cut taxes, and a time to raise taxes, etc. Everything has a season. Balance is the key to life, and, I believe, policy development. Again, there are few black and whites when it comes to developing policy, because you are essentially allocating resources (or, as my undergrad poli sci professor put it: "politics is defined as the authoritative allocation of value.")(I am just realizing how true that is). | ||
Swingline Member Username: Swingline Post Number: 468 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 172.128.169.183 |
When it comes to Michigan's economy, Brandonz made one of the more succinct and accurate statements heard here in a while: Too many state legislators think that everything will be fine as long as their constituents can cheaply drive wherever they want to on wide and fast roads, and they only have to pay nominal taxes. Just let us drive wherever we want and not pay any taxes and poverty and crime will disappear. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 27 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
Perfect Gentleman, Ahh economics sadly dies not work that simply. With the cost going up, people being out of work, the miles being driven is going down, meaning less consumption in general. Combine this with how people are now turning once again to mid-size and smaller sedans instead of Monster Truck 900 series Hemi-Charged, and your net increase is actually quite small. |
