  Richard_saunders Member Username: Richard_saunders Post Number: 66 Registered: 06-2004 |
With the Comerica news, I can't think of any reason NOT to recall Granholm. Daniel Howes' column spells it out well: "Comerica is another in a growing list of companies that have bailed on Michigan during the Granholm era, marked by dithering on budgets, business taxes, structural reform and an uncanny knack for learning about corporate decampments only when the rest of us do. By her own admission, she didn't know about the Comerica decision until Monday. She didn't know about Pfizer Inc.'s decision to close operations in Ann Arbor and Plymouth until it was too late. She expressed shock when Delphi Corp. filed for bankruptcy, even if many others weren't. She learned of Kmart Corp.'s decision to acquire Sears from me, in a German restaurant. Even if state economic development efforts were not a factor in Comerica's decision to move -- and several directors say they weren't -- the Comerica decision and Granholm's reaction to it yet again raise troubling questions about the effectiveness of those efforts and the governor's ties, if any, to key business leaders. Then there's policy. Her Michigan Business Tax reform would increase taxes on financial services firms and insurance companies. With Comerica heading to Texas, could insurance companies, which basically run with people sitting behind computers, be far behind? Maybe. Legislation passed the state House to retroactively repeal limits on pharmaceutical liability for drugs approved by federal regulators about the time Pfizer said it was leaving. Even if the bill, stalled in the Senate, didn't force Pfizer's hand -- and it probably didn't -- could it have made the decision easier? Probably. The business environment matters. What the state's leadership, especially its governor, says about business decisions and the reasons behind them matters. How all of it is perceived by would-be investors and existing Michigan businesses matters." http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070307/O PINION03/703070385 Granholm supporters can only say that it's out of her control. Well, then I pose that it's time to get someone who is in control. The problem for Detroit is that, while KK has done an above-average job of running things in his second term, his city, our city, is now taking the brunt of Granholm's incompetence. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mthouston Member Username: Mthouston Post Number: 750 Registered: 01-2006 |
quote: And who might that be?? One of wonderful State Legislators (These folks have not been much help either). Maybe DeVos, Who do have in mind?? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 80 Registered: 11-2006 |
I hate to tell you, but I bet no matter who the gov. of Michigan is the same stuff would be happening. It's the companies decision to leave and go where their customer base is. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Detroitbill Member Username: Detroitbill Post Number: 166 Registered: 09-2006 |
Its fine to be in control of something you are able to, to think a governor of any state, affiliated with any political party is going to control mind and management decisions made by major corporations in difficult times is just plain loopy. I suppose DeVos would have talked Comerica and the Drug Companies out of this? Not.These decisions are made by forces who have little regard for loyalty, they base their decisions on where the future lies and increased profits appear to be made. Auto dependant Michigan is not the place. It will take years to reverse this economic reality and political forces on both sides of the fence are well aware of its necessity. Lets blame Kwame for the Tigers not winning last year also while we are it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rust Member Username: Rust Post Number: 147 Registered: 08-2004 |
Recall Granholm I Second That! Let us also ask our other politicians what they are doing to improve improve our ability to compete for business. What is you state rep doing? What is the mayor/council of your town doing? Unfortunately for us we only have a few politicians that set the political tone for our region/state. I my opinion they are the Granholm, Kilpatrick, Patterson and the Detroit City Council. What tone have they set? What message have the put out to the business community? By the way Richard Saunders, did you go to Michigan Tech? (Message edited by rust on March 07, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 1531 Registered: 05-2005 |
recall richard saunders! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mrjoshua Member Username: Mrjoshua Post Number: 1242 Registered: 03-2005 |
It is now glaringly obvious that Michigan's Captains of Industry have no respect for our Governor. Comerica made a very big statement by failing to inform our Head of State about their intention to relocate only an hour prior to going public. She really doesn't grasp that corporations exist to make a profit, not ensure jobs are retained and wages increased in an uncompetitive business environment. Her class warfare rhetoric and Socialist ideology are finally taking their toll. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 182 Registered: 03-2006 |
From another thread: I thought Granholm's comments on this matter this morning on WJR were amazing . She said something to the effect that "It should be a major wake-up call to all of us that large companies are putting shareholder value before the interests of the community." I think most of us out there already knew this, she still seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the capitalist system. Her Canadian roots are showing.... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2190 Registered: 10-2003 |
Um, did anyone not read the article that explained why Comerica is relocating? They can't attract employees! You really give Jenny Granholm too much credit if you blame her for the thousands of people who leave Michigan (or don't go there in the first place) for greener pastures and a higher quality of life. But hey--the Legislature got rid of the Single Business Tax! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 183 Registered: 03-2006 |
If the governor of a state has no control of the business climate, which is a false premise, then the governor should admit that and tell everyone to stop talking about it. The MEDC should be dissolved and the governor should stop telling us all how her plan is working and state that it is not her job to bring jobs here. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docmo Member Username: Docmo Post Number: 253 Registered: 10-2005 |
Can Granholm and put Penske in charge. This state needs major changes. Granholm is the weakest, indecisive politician ever. She only knows how to pander to her primary constituencies. Her performance, or lack thereof, should not be tolerated by those of us who care about this state. Forget your silly and destructive party allegiances. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Richard_saunders Member Username: Richard_saunders Post Number: 67 Registered: 06-2004 |
To answer the question of who to replace her with, my answer is: anyone. Make it a wide-open election. Maybe we end up with Roger Penske or someone like that. But it's time for her to go. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2530 Registered: 02-2005 |
We can recall Granholm because she's a shitty governor, but this is not a state-run economy and it's not her responsibility to have on ear on the private decisions of corporations. If, for instance, Pfizer and Comerica came to her with an ultimatem, i.e. things they wanted from the state gov. in order to stick around, and Granholm dropped the ball, then we could be angry at her, but expecting her to prevent Comerica from moving 200 white collar employees is a bit much. And let's be very clear, this is all that Comerica is doing; it's a hurtful symbolic dagger because Comerica has been in Detroit forever, but in the end most of their employees are staying here. The only impacts I see are slightly fewer wealthy people working downtown (perhaps hurting a slice of the downtown service economy) and more houses for sale in Grosse Pointe and Bloomfield. I will fully support a recall of Granholm, but I won't support corporate welfare or a strong-state influenced economy. What we need is a governor who will focus on bringing in new companies through fundamental changes i.e. major tax reform and improving this region to make it functional like any other big city (i.e. keeping the focus on downtown Detroit, and getting regional mass transit). The governor claims that she will make all the hard decisions re: the state budget, yet, we are still spending big dollars building new roads and widening current ones north of M-59 in metro Detroit, and we are still giving rich students the MEAP merit scholarship for college. Both sound like luxuries to me. Meanwhile, what has she really done for Detroit? People want to move to great cities, and it is normally in/near world-class cities that dynamic and growing economies are found. People want to live and work in New York, Chicago, Boston, etc. It's not because they have nice suburbs and nice wide roads, it's because their central cities are world class; even in this ultra-suburban age, a great city is the glue for a great regional economy. So we have a governor who is a democrat and who is supposed to have 'urban priorities,' but she doesn't do much for Detroit. It is the policies of Kilpatrick, and the pure gumption of people with no fear who want to invest/live in Detroit, that is bringing us back, despite the limited outside help. These are my complaints against Granholm. In the end, political climates and politicians themselves can have some impact on an economy, but we have to be selective on what we credit them for. I don't credit Bill Clinton for low unemployment and huge stock market gains in the 90s, and I don't blame Granholm for the continued tail spin of our manufacturing economy, because our manufacturing economy is taking a natural course toward obsolesence, being sped up by the competitive disadvantage of the high wages Michigan workers expect compared to southern and non-American workers. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bongman Member Username: Bongman Post Number: 1437 Registered: 12-2003 |
Certainly political leaders share part of the blame....but we all do. We will become a "right to work" State eventually. The unions will all be busted eventually. Our own attitudes of entitlement will fall eventually, and the Detroit area will assume its true role after the almost total fall of the domestic auto industry in our area. The writing has been on the wall for some time. The outside factors that led to our problems have only just begun. Look at the recent actions of our President related to the auto industry. He refused to meet with them....his policies are clearly union-busting at its best (or worst)...and his only response is to increase the burden of CAFE standards on the industry. When Bush is replaced by a Demmie, the Gov't's stance will be to again support and pander to all the issues that got us in this isolated mess in the first place....unions and protectionism. Boo a Toyota at a Red Wing game....Boo the Governor's husband for telling it like it is...keep isolating minorities....keep that attitude of entitlement that so many folks have around here....keep hiring your neighbors and relatives...and we will continue to go nowhere for many many years to come. Drive thru Buffalo...Youngstown....Gary.. ..Flint....because that is us people.....believe it ! Ask yourself....If you were 25, why would you come here or stay ?.....Fishing ? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thnk2mch Member Username: Thnk2mch Post Number: 784 Registered: 02-2006 |
quote: Which article is that? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docmo Member Username: Docmo Post Number: 254 Registered: 10-2005 |
Recall Granholm!!!!! If California had enough ticked off people to kick Gray Davis out, there should be millions more here who should not tolerate her incompetence. We need to demand more from our leaders or we will end up as Mississippi in the 1970s | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2531 Registered: 02-2005 |
Good posts Bongman and Mrjoshua. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Richard_saunders Member Username: Richard_saunders Post Number: 68 Registered: 06-2004 |
My expectations for Granholm is that a) she should be meeting with business leaders and hearing their concerns (and, gasp!, maybe acting on them), and b) she would not be leading the charge for seriously anti-business changes to existing laws. Based on what we know, she's done neither. Again, the best anyone can say for her is that this wasn't her doing. In the same way, maybe the Tigers 2005 season wasn't Alan Trammell's fault. Alan Trammell, like our Governor, is a great person. But AT couldn't get the job done, and he had to go. Just like Granholm. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Higgs1634 Member Username: Higgs1634 Post Number: 52 Registered: 10-2005 |
Not that think a recall is gonna happen, or that Jenny really has all that much influence on business decisions (however, make this a right to work state and I bet we get a lot more second looks from the Toyotas of the world) but personally this is my favorite quote from that article and effectively encapsulates Jenny's complete lack of connection to the real world. "In a world where major corporations are making decisions for shareholders instead of communities it makes me mad, frankly," Gov. Jennifer Granholm told WJR Tuesday. "It's bad. It is bad." | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thnk2mch Member Username: Thnk2mch Post Number: 785 Registered: 02-2006 |
quote: Granholm does not work at Comerica. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docmo Member Username: Docmo Post Number: 255 Registered: 10-2005 |
Anyone know where I can contribute to this critical grassroots civil cause? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2461 Registered: 11-2003 |
While I wholeheartedly endorse the idea of throwing her sorry behind out of office, I still shake my head at her supporters (whom I've yet to actually meet) who still view this in terms of a democrat/republican paradigm. Pull up the results from last November's election. Contrary to what has been spoon-fed to you by the "mainstream" media, there were five candidates for governor...not two. All the anonymous Granholm-supporters are doing is embarrassing themselves by claiming that Devos is the only other game in town. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 284 Registered: 07-2004 |
Recall Mike Bishop! Still waiting for that GOP budget plan...you know, the one that solves all the problems by only cutting government spending...but not corrections, we can't close a prison...and we can't lay off state troopers...but we'll cut something. Just give us a few more weeks, and we'll tell you. quote: Mike Bishop, 2/15/07 (Message edited by udmphikapbob on March 07, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mthouston Member Username: Mthouston Post Number: 751 Registered: 01-2006 |
OK you recall Granhom, then what?? Who do you replace her with. There has got to be somebody, right. Lets have a name. Are we ready to spend millions of State tax dollars on a recall election? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blort Member Username: Blort Post Number: 51 Registered: 02-2007 |
Why didn't some of you people run for governor? Doesn't matter who's in office, this state is still going to shit. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2463 Registered: 11-2003 |
I'm very disappointed in Mike Bishop's "plan" as well. Supposedly, he has already revealed the plan to other members of the legislature on both sides of the aisle, under the agreement that no one says anything about what the plan entails. As for recalling Granholm, it wouldn't nearly as much as the 'millions" mentioned above. First off there is a six months window to gather signatures. Even if a petition were drafted and copies made, the window would close around the time of the 2007 primary election. The recall vote should be easily placed in with the 2007 General election in November, hopefully if there are still any businesses left and residents around to actually cast a vote. As for whom to replace her with...let's see who throws their hat in the ring. I'm not in favor of "drafting" anyone for guv, especially if their heart isn't into it. But I am confident that there are several people who would announce, if the seat were to become open after a recall. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 168 Registered: 11-2006 |
I fail to see the problems with Michigan, Ohio and N.Y being political (previous poster mentions Detroit, Flint, Youngstown and Buffalo). Until Nov 7, 2006 one would be hard pressed to make the case that the DEMOCRATS controlled the governerships and legislatures in those states. Last I checked, Ohio has been run in Columbus by Republicans for many years and same with N.Y in Albany. What do Granholm, Taft and Pataki have in common? Not much. Sorry, but I think governors are being made fall guys (or fall gal) for deeper problem which can't be solved by an election. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 633 Registered: 11-2003 |
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20070307/COL 06/703070415 "In a world where these major corporations are making decisions on the basis of shareholders rather than on the basis of community, it makes me mad, frankly," Is she the governor of a large state or a ten year old? At best she sounds like an idiotic caller to one of the radio talk shows. Well, if nothing else at least she's mad. Instead of demonizing large corporations because it plays well among a lot of her voters she should be kissing their asses. I heard her WJR interview and a good portion of it was nothing but big business bashing. If she's going to pass the buck every time the state loses companies and jobs she should stop holding press conferences and waving her pom poms every time the state picks up a few jobs. There probably is no one better for the job of gov in this state which speaks to what a pathetic group of politicians we have. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 472 Registered: 04-2006 |
Michigan might be in a lot better shape now if all of the governors preceding her for the last 30 years hadn't let Detroit fall to shit. Especially Engler, who was calling the shots during most of the time that other states (NY, IL) were revitalizing their urban core. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Goat Member Username: Goat Post Number: 9265 Registered: 10-2003 |
...that deeper problem is that there isn't a corporate conscience anymore. I read the other day that only 1% of Canadian companies donate to charity! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 184 Registered: 03-2006 |
If the governor can't affect the business outlook how can they prevent Detroit from falling to shit? The city of Detroit has been run by Liberal Democrats for decades, do they get a pass? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2191 Registered: 10-2003 |
I thought repeal of the Single Business Tax was going to jumpstart the state economy. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 185 Registered: 03-2006 |
I wish you libs would be honest. If a Republican were in office none of you would be saying that "it isn't the governor's fault that we have a weak economy in this state." You seem to agree with Granholm when she blames Engler for the states problems, which pathetically she still does. So when Engler was in he had EVERYTHING to do with the issues of the state but Granholm has NOTHING to do with it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 473 Registered: 04-2006 |
I didn't give anyone a pass, but she is not Atlas and the world isn't entirely on her shoulders. I think that anti-urban legislature that Michigan has let run amuck for decades carries a lot more of the blame than her. One of the key reasons Comerica cited for moving is their inability to attract talent to the area. This isn't the first time a company has stated that about Michigan and Detroit. You have to ask yourself, eventually, why a state that is home to one of the highest regarded educational institutions on the face of the planet would have trouble attracting talented individuals to live there permanently? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 474 Registered: 04-2006 |
For the record, I'm not saying that Jenny has done no wrong. But I do recognize that she is trying to fix an institutional problem that was largely ignored by the administration preceding hers. Just like the car companies ignored their institutional problems during the SUV boom of the 90s which is why they are in the shape they're in today. Michigan's financial woes would've happened squarely within Engler's term had it not been for the SUV craze. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1776 Registered: 06-2004 |
Perfectgentleman, you seem to forget that there's a state Congress involved, too - you know, the ones who created the current gaping hole in the budget. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 186 Registered: 03-2006 |
Lilpup - Granholm has alot to do with the state budget woes, she is unwilling to cut in areas that are near and dear to her main constituents, where much of the savings could be realized. The reason that we cannot attract talented individuals is BECAUSE of the lack of opportunity. We do a great job subsidizing the educations of people who have no intention of staying here. Granholm is always talking about how important education is which is true, yet the other side of the equation, opportunity, is ignored. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5611 Registered: 02-2004 |
Recalling Granholm is a VERY BAD IDEAL. She didn't know that Comerica's move to Redneckopolis would effect of economy. Especially in Detroit. There's nothing she or KING KWAME can't do to stop Comerica's corporate progress. Basically it's Comerica corporate executives fault for f*&%ing Detroit and leave. You all could take part and help Granholm and our leaders to stay the course. Taking Granholm out of governance would be TERRIBLE mistake. What she's trying to do and in her liberal power to find a way to clean up Engler's deficit mess and to bring jobs to Michigan. We Michiganders could help, too and we need her support. Imagine if DeVos became governor. He would use his conservative scare tactics to bring jobs to Michigan and make poor folks pay the penalty. As for right now Comerica is finish in Detroit. Lots of jobs are being lost and people playing the Mega Millions lottery so that they could win millions of dollars and live their champaign wishes and caviar dreams. One day Detroit and rest of Michigan would have their day. More jobs and economic growth are comming. We just have to be patience and rely on faith from God to pull through. If the U.S. can survive the Great Depression of the 1930s then Michigan can survive the economic depression of 2000. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1777 Registered: 06-2004 |
quote: So you want her to cut education and provide some corporate incentive to attract and retain business? Is that it? If not please say specifically where you want her to cut and how you want her to help create the opportunities you speak of. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 285 Registered: 07-2004 |
you do know that the annual 6% per capita spending reductions we have already endured in this state are the most of any state in the nation, right? not to say that there aren't places to cut still, but we need new streams of revenue to invest in the kinds of things that make people want to live here and businesses want to grow here. many people get a great education here, and leave for Chicago or the south or west. those places aren't segregated "doughnut" regions with a sprawling suburban wasteland surrounding a decayed and ignored urban core. this is going to take a long time to fix, and we're going to need better leaders across the board to do it. Granholm, in my opinion, is doing an adequate job given the situation at hand. Vote PhiKapBob '08! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 187 Registered: 03-2006 |
I want government to stop meddling in the private sector completely and get out the education business. They suck at literally everything they do so state government should be reduced on all fronts. Politicians should also stop being stooges for the unions. The incentives for business should be coming to a state that has its fiscal house in order, lower tax rates, reasonable regulations and the ability to hire a work force they can partner with, not have as an adversary. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2532 Registered: 02-2005 |
Cut all MDOT new construction projects and put it towards mass transit. If we have a functional metro area with an emphasis on the city, we will attract workers and companies commensurately. As I have advocated before, she should cut the MEAP merit scholarship for rich kids. It should only be for people who can't afford college. I usually like merit scholarship, but the state can't afford this. Perfectgentleman is exactly right with his second point. People work hard for a degree at UM, Wayne, or MSU, and then most of them want to live in/near a world-class city. And, Lilpup, cutting education is exactly what has been going on. The state used to fund 70 percent of UM's general fund. It is now under 25 percent. I recently heard the former UM Provost Paul Courant talk about this. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2192 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: For the record, Granholm's Fix-It First program was an attempt at this. Well, the "cutting" part, anyway. It was overturned by the Republican-controlled Legislature. It was only a matter of time before Michigan started to cannibalize itself. The warning signs have been there for years. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11389 Registered: 10-2003 |
I love how between last night the headline in the Freep changed from "Granholm doesn't have any answers at Town Hall meeting" to "Maybe declare disaster, protester tells Granholm" Why not just tell it like it is? Don't focus on the fact that somebody in the crowd suggest we declare disaster, focus on the fact that our governor had no answers! SHE is the one in charge, SHE makes the decisions, SHE is the one that should be in the headlines. How many more companies and jobs will this state lose due to her incompetence? Now I see that local and state officials plan to protest outside Comerica, for making what seems to be a logical step from a business standpoint. Where they should be protesting is in Lansing, as the economic climate of this state is the reason Comerica is moving their HQ. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 1304 Registered: 02-2004 |
So by extension, we should recall both Granholm and Bush? A most entertaining thread. More please! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Higgs1634 Member Username: Higgs1634 Post Number: 53 Registered: 10-2005 |
why would the recall extend to Bush? 49 other states are doing better than Michigan... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jsmitty Member Username: Jsmitty Post Number: 1 Registered: 03-2007 |
Let¡¦s cut to the chase! Comerica is not leaving because of Granholm. Comerica is leaving because they needs and the ¡§I hate Detroit¡¨ campaign doesn¡¦t bring you profits, good employees and world prestige. The entire world knows Detroit for crime, cars and poverty. For years we (Detroit) have been at the mercy of everyone in the stat of Michigan. We have been treated like a poor red-headed stepchild while Oakland County boasts and brags about being one of the richest riches counties in the country. EVERYTHING IS FALLING APART NOW. No one around the globe could care less if Oakland County is one of the riches counties in the country. Years upon years of racism against Detroit is finally taken its toll on Detroit and now the State. No one wants to relocate here because of the racism, crime, lack of public transportation and yes the weather. College grads go where the rent is cheap and the night life is plentiful. Too many naysayer¡¦s from across Eight mile keep telling us ¡§any new development that requires taxes has to benefit the residents of Oakland County and too many blowhards from Detroit talk so much crap about nothing¡¨ that it amazes me how long took for companies to leave the area. The downsizing of the Big Three probably hurt white collar suburbanites more than the African-American¡¦s in Detroit. Those cushy office jobs handed down by daddy and his friends are no longer there because you sat on your fanny and made a fortune from stupid deals, bad car designs and giving nothing back in the form of quality and at the same time saying stupid things like ¡§I never go to Detroit¡¨. I¡¦ll bet you many people from the state of Illinois travel to Chicago and I¡¦ll bet you update New Yorker¡¦s drive to the city to do things. Here in Michigan, we hear I hate that place, its dirty, and its dark and I don¡¦t feel safe. Now the country will be saying the same thing about Michigan. Good bye Comerica, plant jobs, Pfizer, etc¡K You deserve to be in a location that is friendly, vibrant, positive, and profitable. We in Michigan will continue to blame our economy on the democrats, republicans, blacks, the poor, weather, gas prices, and ignorant politicians from Wayne, Macomb and Oakland counties. This method has carried us for the last 100 years. Why would we want to stop now? We are on a roll. Hopefully MGM, Motor city and Greek Town can save us because we can¡¦t save ourselves. Just like cancer, racism will slowly eat us alive and we are seeing the repercussions from our selfish ways. Thanks again L. Brooks, Coleman, Kwame, Steenburgh, Archer, out state republicans and others who have had a hand in the demise of Detroit through inept policies and racially motivated propaganda. Thanks Jenny for leading down the path of nowhere. It¡¦s not your fault that companies are leaving; you inherited a mess in the making. This has been a long time coming. mmm Dick Devos may have kept Comerica here if he promised to move his money there but there would have been other companies that would leave as well. Can we get on with life now and act like adults? ƒº | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 651 Registered: 12-2005 |
I believe that Michigan state law prevents any recall of an elected official within the first six months of their term of office. The last thing Michigan needs right now is the terrible distraction that a recall campaign would become. We need to put some heavy-duty grass-roots pressure on all of our elected officials and deliver the message that we want them to get off their posturing duffs and do something different NOW! Regarding the statement above that "the annual 6% per capita spending reductions we have already endured in this state are the most of any state in the nation" Where do you get your facts from? When I look at the annual budgets which have been proposed over the past few years by the Governor and also what actual budget spending was approved by the State Legislature, I cannot see how your statement could be any where close to being true. Here are the State Budget facts as provided by the State of Michigan Budget Office website (only the fiscal years 2000-2007 are available - Engler's last budget recommendation was for FY 2003):
Granholm's first budget recommendation is the only one that represented a "cut" in the true sense of the word and it was only a 3% reduction from the prior year's appropriation. The State of Michigan has not been losing population, it has been stagnant, so I don't see how that 6% per capita estimate can be supported by any real data. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Higgs1634 Member Username: Higgs1634 Post Number: 54 Registered: 10-2005 |
shhhhh! dont post real data.... hyperbole and irrationality is all that is allowed here. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 169 Registered: 11-2006 |
One thing that Gary, Detroit, Youngstown, Flint and Buffalo have in common: COLD WEATHER It is imperative that downtown Detroit continue to become a great place to work, and visit for entertainment and sports, higher education, etc. Politicians, corporate leaders, and citizens can change that. No one can change the weather. Think of it this way, Detroit has to be a GREATER city then say Dallas or Charlotte, N.C. or because they have milder climates which presumably is more desirable to most. (Message edited by emu_steve on March 07, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2706 Registered: 10-2004 |
Mikeg, I suppose you know well about the types of BS cuts that radiclibs claim to make. Either they're reductions from an initial budget increase which gets reduced as a "concession" on their part OR they're simply a reduction in the rate from the previous term's growth. Both are total BS with the intent to deceive. But again, it's isn't really difficult to pull the wool over most Detroiters' eyes, considering their sky-high level of functional illiteracy (over a majority of Detroiters) or their school drop-out rates (also a majority)... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 287 Registered: 07-2004 |
My facts come from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 2004 report on the fiscal crisis of shrinking state budgets: http://www.cbpp.org/10-22-03sf p3.htm State General Fund spending per capita decreased 5.8% in 2002-03, and 6.6% in 03-04. Maybe my general fund numbers - which is the part of the budget that legislation has the most effect on - are different that your total budget figures which may include things that couldn't be legally cut? I direct you also to the 2006 Rockefeller Institute Report on State and Local Government Finances: http://rfs.rockinst.org/exhibi t/9054/Full%20Text/GovtFinance sBrief2001Recession.pdf Real per capita tax revenue to the State has decreased by over 9% 2000-05. Michigan is one of 14 states where State Government employment per 1000 population has decreased more than 5%. One more nugget from a 2006 report on the consequences of 1990s tax cuts: quote: (Message edited by udmphikapbob on March 07, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 652 Registered: 12-2005 |
The CBPP web page explains their method for "Adjusting State Spending For Population and Inflation". In other words, they calculate spending changes after adjusting the amounts for the erosion of their purchasing power by inflation and also by adjusting it for being spent on more people, which also dramatizes their plight. Personally, when the State of Michigan begins allowing me to adjust my taxable income to reflect inflation's erosion of my purchasing power, I'll accept this kind of a bureaucratic analysis. In the meantime, the state bureaucrats can cry me a river and you can take these manipulated "facts" and shove them where the sun doesn't shine. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2193 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: You know what New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, and Cleveland have in common? COLD WEATHER What's your point? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 289 Registered: 07-2004 |
so then Mike, if you get a 3% raise at your job, but inflation goes up 4%, and you have a new baby to take care of, did you still get a raise? there are still ways that cuts can be made in this state. i'm not happy with the overhead involved in education spending. i think we need to modify sentencing so that we bring our prison populations in line with neighboring states. these are suggestions. where are the GOP solutions? blame/recall Granholm doesn't fix the hole. tell me what you'd cut. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jeduncan Member Username: Jeduncan Post Number: 51 Registered: 11-2006 |
Well. Since we're a capitalist nation, nobody -- Republican or democrat -- could change the goings-on of businesses here in michigan. How do you convince a corporation to stay in a place where they aren't making 100% of their potential profit. If a company is going to leave, they're going to leave, and there's nothing granholm, bush, devos, whoever can do to change it (to an extent). How long until the rest of those jobs are all gone (and the ones at the livonia offices)? More hungry families in michigan. This could potentially be one more empty building in Detroit. fuckin' depressing news. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 188 Registered: 03-2006 |
The notion that living in a "capitalist nation" means that government and lawmakers have no impact on the economic situation is preposterous. The fact that other states are out-performing us is proof of that. Right-to-Work, taxes, regulation, exposure to liability, education, infrastructure and roads are just a few of the things that affect business that government has a tremendous impact on. What we don't need is new taxes that the vast majority of states don't have and a governor who makes noise about confiscating profits to fund her pet projects. We also don't need a legislature that RETROACTIVELY changes laws that can hurt business like they are doing with the recent proposed drug legislation. Whether the original legislation was a good idea or not, it sends the wrong message that we will actually change the rules after the game is underway. Most new small/medium business, which is where the growth will come from, would prefer NOT to have their workers in a union. This is painfully obvious. They have seen all too well what that environment has wrought at the big 3 and have no desire to follow suit. (Message edited by perfectgentleman on March 07, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 653 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: Of course not. The new baby would be "covered" by the additional personal exemption I receive but the scenario you describe still leaves me with ~1% less purchasing power. Let me reduce my AGI by that amount and then maybe the CBPP analysis could be used to make a more honest argument. As I've written in this forum before, I think a good place to start is by breaking the grip that the MEA has on the health care coverage for their teachers. Allowing school districts with MEA teacher contracts to competitively bid for health care coverage could yield more than $100M in annual savings that could go directly to the classroom in districts across the state. Additional reforms that could save hundreds of millions would be to align health care coverage for all teachers, state employees and their retirees so that they have co-pays and deductibles comparable to Michigan workers in the private sector. Ditto for converting all remaining state workers who are still in a defined-benefit pension plan into a defined-contribution plan. These represent hundreds of millions of dollars of savings opportunities (and they would not require state employee headcount reductions), yet the Governor never considered fighting for them before going to her "Two Penny" solution and it is very clear that she never will support those kinds of changes. To those on other threads who keep suggesting that Michigan's tax burden is modest compared to some other states, all I can say is that so long as we have to pay a tax upon a tax every time we fill up our gas tank, Michigan's image will remain that of a "high tax state". | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 189 Registered: 03-2006 |
Here is table for corporate tax burden by state, we are the worst: Getting rid of the SBT should change this for the future, hopefully. State Rank Wyo. 1 S.D. 1 Nev. 1 Utah 4 Va. 5 Ga. 6 Md. 7 Miss. 8 Hawaii 9 Mo. 10 S.C. 11 Tenn. 12 Okla. 13 Fla. 14 Colo. 15 Mont. 16 Tex. 17 La. 18 Idaho 19 Ore. 20 Ala. 21 Ind. 22 N.Y. 23 Ariz. 24 N.C. 25 W.Va 26 Alaska 27 Conn. 28 N.D. 29 Ill. 30 Vt. 31 Wis. 32 Wash. 33 Nebr. 34 R.I. 35 Ark. 36 N.M. 37 Kans. 38 Ohio 39 Calif. 40 N.J. 41 Pa. 42 Ky. 43 Maine 44 Minn. 45 Iowa 46 Mass. 47 Del. 48 N.H. 49 Mich. 50 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1782 Registered: 06-2004 |
source? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Richard_saunders Member Username: Richard_saunders Post Number: 69 Registered: 06-2004 |
Of course Granholm supporters want to hear what departments would be cut if she were recalled. But running state government is only one part of her job. As the columnist wrote above, "The business environment matters. What the state's leadership, especially its governor, says about business decisions and the reasons behind them matters. How all of it is perceived by would-be investors and existing Michigan businesses matters." She does not run the state government well, and she does not run the state well. Time for Michigan to make a change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 190 Registered: 03-2006 |
Source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/n ews/show/2181.html | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 654 Registered: 12-2005 |
Lilpup, You want sources? Here's the source of Perfectgentlemans data on the corporate tax index rankings: State Business Tax Climate Index Rankings by State, 2007; The Tax Foundation While we are at it, here is 2006 study conducted by the state of Wisconsin which identifies Michigan as having the second-worst corporate tax burden out of 15 states with major wood-products manufacturers. As a result of changes in the WI business tax laws, in 2008 they will have dropped from 5th worst to 11th worst. While other states are making themselves more competitive, our elected officials continue to fiddle around while Rome burns. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1394 Registered: 11-2003 |
We can complain all we want about Granholm, but the GOP put up Dick DeVos as their candidate. Seriously, he may be a businessman, but he was less than clear about his intentions, which left people to wonder if he lived up to his social conservative views. If the GOP would have put up a viable candidate, they would have creamed Granholm. With that said the Democrats need to stop beating the its Engler's fault drum. They had their chance to get rid of him, and they put up Geoffery Feiger. I was not a big fan of Engler, but I sure as hell was not going to vote to Feiger. The Dems are just as guilty of not fixing problems. Mike Bishop needs to release his plan and they need to get down to fixing the state's broken tax structure. There is no time for screwing around. Every day that we do not have a solution is another day that a business is not looking at Michigan because there is too many unanswered questions. I tend to believe the state GOP is stalling because they know the SBT will expire, and without a replacement they will have their tax cut and have to do nothing to get it but sit on their hands. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2533 Registered: 02-2005 |
Well said, Bob. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 132 Registered: 11-2006 |
Recall?? No, she gained office via our democratic system, and we/the voters get what we vote for. No need to be upset with her, she is doing exactly what she was elected to do...that is, being a liberal democrat which means increasing taxes, increasing spending on entitlements, fostering class envy largely in the form of anti business legislation. Comerica, being a business, is also doing what they are supposed to do....make money. If the tax environment in the state causes them to lose more money than they would in another state, and/or threatens to do so (as is the case with Granholm's proposed tax on services), then the correct choice is to go where they can make more money. We have Granholm (or any elected representative for that matter) for the duration of her elected term (unless they resign, or are removed for truly unethical and illegal behavior). The lesson that needs learning is on the part of the voters. If they don't want this kind of leadership, then don't elect them next time. Recalls are a legitimate avenue of public expression, but should be reserved for instances where the elected official in question is doing things contrary to the character upon which they gained office in the first place....Granholm is doing no such thing. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1395 Registered: 11-2003 |
And people were just as ticked with Engler and I remember people trying to recall him and it never happened. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 203 Registered: 08-2006 |
The problems that this state face are much more broad and complex than just the governors office. I think that getting all excited by having Granholm in office or getting her removed is looking at things at a level all to simple. There is alot more that lead to Comerica leaving than Granholm. That is just my opinion. Take it or leave it | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 133 Registered: 11-2006 |
Bigger than Granholm? Yes, and no....Granholm is representative of liberal policy that is unfriendly to business where it matters most...bottom line/profits. Businesses are not much interested in loyalty, history, praise by politicians (or the public), especially not at the expense of a competitive edge. In their defense, if they are not competitive, they risk elimination. While they may give lip service to all of the public service mumbo jumbo, that is all public relations. At the core it is about winning which means providing the best service/product at the lowest cost in order to make the biggest profit. Contrary to what the left would have you believe, what is good for business, is good for the individual. Successful businesses employ more people, buy more goods and services (from other businesses), invest more money, and grow the economy. The paradox is that the left has successfully fooled about half of the populace that the opposite is true. Fiscal conservatives, or free enterprise capitalists, understand this. Liberals do not. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Barnesfoto Member Username: Barnesfoto Post Number: 3133 Registered: 10-2003 |
I recall the depth of the other candidate, so no thanks.  | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1785 Registered: 06-2004 |
quote:And the reality lies between. All one has to do is follow the money trail. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docmo Member Username: Docmo Post Number: 256 Registered: 10-2005 |
No doubt Devos and his ultra conservative social agenda were not right for Michigan. That's why he lost by such a significant margin. His business smarts, though, would have undoubtedly been better for the state than this schitt Granholm has blown us away with. The leaders of this state need to convince Penske he alone has the skills to lead the state out of this abyss. California did it. So can Michigan. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2465 Registered: 11-2003 |
Does anyone here really know if Penske is really interested in the job? His name keeps getting bandies about, yet I haven't heard anything from him. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 291 Registered: 07-2004 |
Wisconsin is ranked #38 overall on the Tax Foundation list, and we're #27, yet we should emulate them? Way to handpick one stat guys. How about us being ranked 10th best for small businesses in a 2006 Forbes Small Business / Small Business & Entrepreneurial Council survey? Ahead of darlings like Tennessee and Arizona, for example. http://money.cnn.com/magazines /fsb/fsb_beststates/2006/snaps hots/10.html quote: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1396 Registered: 11-2003 |
Yes, DeVos had to many issues to be elected to governor, but Granholm would have been better served by asking DeVos to serve her administration in some fashion. His business expertise is working in a global economy has a place in our state (it has too), but there was just too many other questions about his social view to get him elected. I think he needs to clarify his stance on things clearly and prove that his beliefs will not get in the way of his governing the state and we have a possibly successful candidate. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2467 Registered: 11-2003 |
BTW, just for grins and giggles: what's everyone's take on the other three candidates for guv? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1787 Registered: 06-2004 |
Penske would never do it. He can accomplish far more out of a political office than in one. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mthouston Member Username: Mthouston Post Number: 757 Registered: 01-2006 |
Libertarian Greg Creswell Green Party Douglas Campbell Constitution Party Bhagwan Dashairya They were some wild and crazy guys.... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2468 Registered: 11-2003 |
And your take on each of them, Mthouston? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 134 Registered: 11-2006 |
Yes, it is the lesser of 2 evils in most all political contests...and that is still "evil". By and large, people need to examine where they stand on issues, choose who comes closest, and vote accordingly. Philosophically: Democrats=liberal=socialist=co llectivist=anticapitalist=anti business=anti individual liberty=pro entitlements=anti family=pro big government/big taxes, etc. Republican=conservative=pro free enterprise=pro individual liberty=pro capitalist=anti big government/taxes (I WISH!!!!) Libertarian=anti government....period Green party=antireality=prodeception =evil. Politicians=pro individual and party power and money. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 867 Registered: 06-2004 |
She is out to lunch; she is failing to take basic action to recruit and retain business. She should have been put in front of a firing squad for the Toyota land debacle. I hear tell that she blew off SBC when they were deciding where to put a large number of jobs and Brooks Patterson had to run down to Texas to lobby for the state. Her 2 billion high tech investment fund is misguided and a collosal waste of money. The grant recipients are wholly undeserving, often no more than companies set up solely to get the grant money. I thought I saw an article the other day to the effect that most of the recipients have a friend or relative on the "commission" that doles out the money. She is truly a liability. This isn't about party politics or George Bush or the fucking Iraq War or great philisophical questions about the nature of government. It's state government. Bread and butter, blocking and tackling. We need efficient effective delivery of governments services, a competitive business environment and successful research universities. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 118 Registered: 04-2006 |
Ccbatson: Democrats=socialist/collectivi st? Huh? Supporting social security and unions doesn't make you a collectivist. Nor does regulating business. Enough with the hyperbolic bullshit. The Democrats are decidedly right-of-center compared to the political spectra in most of the civilized world, and are but a sliver to the left of the Republicans on most issues. Republicans=pro individual liberty? What about the "social fabric," the evangelical Bible-thumpers, the PATRIOT Act, etc.? There's an awful lot more to individual rights than gun control. Your generalizations are simplistic and downright nonsensical. I'm not even going to get into "Green Party=antireality." | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx Post Number: 688 Registered: 02-2004 |
If we're not recalling Bush after all this time, don't expect Granholm to get recalled. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 232 Registered: 08-2006 |
There is so much litter. My girlfriends dad lost her job. COmerica is leaving. Trucks arent selling, Detroit is loosing population. the inner ring suburbs are loosing people. factories are polluting. Crime is out of control. are schools are failing. Thank you Granholm for causing us all of this trouble. She is so bad look at all the shit that happens cause of her! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cinderpath Member Username: Cinderpath Post Number: 45 Registered: 05-2006 |
Perfect Gentleman writes: I think most of us out there already knew this, she still seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the capitalist system. Her Canadian roots are showing.... I don't know, Ontario and Canada's economy is booming compared to Michigan's. Comments like these illustrate how little you know about your northern neighbor, who understand capitalism perfectly well, and also seem to have a much better and more realistic approach to social issues beyond a "Faith Based" mentality which along with Iraq is leading our country to the poor house. I wish more of her "Canadian Roots" would show, if this state were half a successful as Ontario is at the moment. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 223 Registered: 03-2006 |
Cinderpath - The unemployment rate in Canada is 6.2%. In the US it is 4.5%. Trying to isolate Ontario is clever but not effective. That is like saying that Grand Rapids is booming so we should adopt the policies of those leaders, would you be for that? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5207 Registered: 10-2003 |
You kind of wonder how she gets anything done, at all, with people like many on this forum that want her and the state to fail. When too many people are putting all of their energy into to well-spun pessimism, pity parties, and self-sabotage, one has got to wonder. Why do we expect out-of-staters to believe in Michigan, when we don't even believe in the state ourselves? Yes, it's all Granholm's fault. Just like everyone of American's problems are Bush fault, right? Ha! People that make blanket statements need to be put to bed with those blanket. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 224 Registered: 03-2006 |
I don't blame her for all of our problems, I do blame her for not addressing the real issues that caused them for political reasons as I have stated on numerous threads on this board. Inventing new taxes for example, I don't feel is a good idea. Should we just go along with every plan and scheme big government comes up with so we don't run the risk of being pessimistic? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1749 Registered: 12-2003 |
The question is not "is it her fault" the question is "what is she going to do". Raising taxes while her husband can keep three aides while costing approx 1,900 jobs in the first year of her outrageous tax-plan and license scheme does not make the State better or in place it on a better path. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzzman0077 Member Username: Buzzman0077 Post Number: 17 Registered: 11-2006 |
She never should have been elected in her first term, shame on us for continuing to listen to the excuses she made and re-elect her. It's about time MI makes a good choice in regards to Jen and boot her out of Lansing. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 225 Registered: 03-2006 |
I am having trouble with Granolms math on the 2% service tax. She claims it will raise 1.5 billion dollars and cost the average taxpayer $67 per year. If you take that figure and divide it by the number of households in Michigan than you get $385.00 per household. If you divide the 1.5 billion by the total population you get $149 per person. At $67 per every man woman and chid, you would raise about 670 million. So that would mean she seems to be assuming that the majority of the 1.5 billion would be made up by visitors to the state. I find this hard to believe as it would mean visitors purchase far more services than residents. Am I missing something? (Message edited by perfectgentleman on March 12, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 171 Registered: 03-2006 |
I like Granholm. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5209 Registered: 10-2003 |
Perfectgentleman, It's perfectly legitimate to take issue with, and criticize, her policies. In fact, you wouldn't be a good citizen if you carefully mull public policy. I'm not lecturing anyone on that. But, I sick and tired of these hyperbolic, self-righteous reactions (i.e. Recall Granholm) where I can just imagine a few of you damn-near fainting with indignation. Just look at post #1. Any thoughtful, half-intelligent individual would know that Granholm is not to blame for Comerica's move. It's silly statements like that, and the rampant "the sky is falling" attitude that gets me, as if people are wishing that it would. You know, our reality is just as much a result of our actual economic state (which is not good) as it is our multiple self-fulfilling prophecies. (Message edited by lmichigan on March 12, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cliff19336 Member Username: Cliff19336 Post Number: 3 Registered: 02-2007 |
MikeG, Don't you realize that only about $8B of the state budget is up for grabs? The remainder of the budget is constitutionally restricted. And the repeal of the SBT just cut more than $2B from the $8B general fund, with no replacement dollars. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzzman0077 Member Username: Buzzman0077 Post Number: 21 Registered: 11-2006 |
I don't think many of us are particularly blaming Granholm for Comerica, but the cumulative effect of her terms in office have be bad for MI. We need not to ride her out, and wait to elect someone better in the next election. We need to get her out now before she is given an chance to squander any more of our growth potential. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 776 Registered: 10-2003 |
"MikeG, Don't you realize that only about $8B of the state budget is up for grabs? The remainder of the budget is constitutionally restricted." We are constitutionally required to spend the rest of this money? That's an interesting interpretation. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cliff19336 Member Username: Cliff19336 Post Number: 4 Registered: 02-2007 |
There is so much misinformation here its frightening. Do we really think we can look at one line from the budget and make the assumption that we know what's wrong with the State government? PerfectGentlemen, wouldn't the majority of service taxes be paid by corporations. Perhaps $67 per household figure is what individuals and not corporations would pay? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 777 Registered: 10-2003 |
If a corporation pays a service tax, they: a) pass it on to consumers with higher prices b) reduce costs such as payroll if they ca't pass it on c) lose sales due to consumer decisions to spend their money elsewhere due to the higher cost of goods d) leave the high tax location to do business where they are able to make a better profit or more sales due to a more attractive tax structure. All of these tax policies have consequences and to say that its "ok" because they are paid by corporations seems to miss that reality. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1399 Registered: 11-2003 |
Granholm is not all to blame for the states problems, but she is equally to blame for not working with the legislature to fix the problems. At least give her credit for having a plan, all the GOP have is Bishop saying we have a plan, but we're not going to tell the taxpayer what it is. Granholm does need to listen to the people though. The majority have said we'd rather have you raise the income tax a little than put that service tax in place. In her trying not to hurt residents she is, since the service tax will hit businesses is turn will not hire people since they have to pay more taxes (or move to another state where it is cheaper to do business). Raising the income tax will hit people that have an income (and not deter business from investing here). With that said people also want to know that there is nothing left to cut before they raise taxes. I think the state needs to say how much each thing (service) cost and how much it will be cut back without any additional funding. Let the people know what they will have if they choose to do nothing. Then people can decide if they want to raise taxes for something or give it up and pay less. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 778 Registered: 10-2003 |
give it up and pay less. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1400 Registered: 11-2003 |
I think the give it up option is the one people are choosing, but people also need to know what the ramifications of their choice are, but then again, there are ramifications from raising taxes and ramifications from not raising taxes. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 512 Registered: 01-2005 |
Don't blame Granholm's Canadian heritage for her political and economic views. She's a product of McNamara's crooked politcal machine. She's just another hack politician who sold her soul and policy making position to the unions. (Not to blame the unions, which got what they paid for, rare these days. Once bought, she'll stay bought until the state's completely under.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 226 Registered: 03-2006 |
Cliff19336 - I suppose that there would be taxes on services for business, but they would merely pass the cost of that on to the consumer as Irish_mafia has stated. In fact, many would raise prices incrementally in excess of the 2% to cover the administrative cost of dealing with it. Another issue is that a business like a theater, who may be charging $7-8 for admission, will not charge $7.14 or $8.32, they will go to $7.25 or $8.50 so they can make change efficiently. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1751 Registered: 12-2003 |
Exactly, and possible even more to cover the cost of adding these taxes to the books. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Detroitsuperfly Member Username: Detroitsuperfly Post Number: 5 Registered: 07-2005 |
Boy you republicans can't win elections so you whine. We won, you lost, get over it. Don't be a SOre Loserman! LMFAO! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2744 Registered: 10-2004 |
quote: And just what of any value did you win??? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 177 Registered: 04-2006 |
Maybe if we didn't have a half-empty city and soon-to-be half empty metro area to support, we wouldn't have to raise the cost of living to support the home building maddness that takes place in this region when economic times are good. When I moved to this area in 2004, I recall the urban fringe of Macomb and Shelby Twps being consumed by the most crappy, cheap, McMaterial housing developments for no reason at all. We weren't growing back then, but now that we're stagnant or shrinking, who is going to pay for this recklessness? I hate to stereotype, but this type of lifestyle is typically the product of conservative republicans. We are all to blame, and there are probably just as many liberals as guilty, but it is for this reason, reflective throughout this uglified landscape of ours that we're all going to have to pay for it. I would LOVE to cut services if cutting services meant that if you live at 39 Mile, YOU YOURSELF pays every true cost, down to the penny that sprawling that far out reveals. Here lies the continuing saga of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. The middle class suckers are forced to become selfish and rich or risk falling into the rising depths of poverty. Looks like either way now in Michigan, there's going to be a lot more poor people because again, when economic times are good, we suck the life out of existing communities so that the middle class can keep up with the rich on the outer fringes. INVEST IN CITIES!!!! I don't care if it's Detroit, Dearborn, Troy, Royal Oak, Sterling Heights, or New Baltimore. Stop building useless crap that's just going to fall on everyone as a burdon. It's not Granholm's fault, it's not Engler's fault. It's not the fault of the state legislature. It's the power of the Michigan people. Either change attitude and policy, or expect these types of outcomes in our (currently) one industry state! (Message edited by Rocket City on March 12, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 234 Registered: 03-2006 |
Rocket_city - You really sound like a communist to me. You seem to be advocating forcing people to live in the city. Not everyone likes the city, especially Detroit. The homes in the suburban areas you hate were built based on perceived demand, it was not based on recklessness but free market economics. If the city offered a good quality of life, which is safe, clean neighborhoods, good schools, a decent return on your investment, access to shopping and employment opportunities then more people would live there. Detroit has some of those things in certain, small areas but not enough to make it compelling enough to get large numbers of new residents or even keep the residents they have now. Most investment comes from the private sector. Investments are made by companies and people who want to realize a good return on their money. It is clear that they have chosen to invest in other areas outside of the city (and the state) because they feel they will realize a better return. Until it can be demonstrated that investing in the city makes sense for the private sector, Detroit will continue to flounder. The crime rate and the schools alone make most people with families never consider Detroit. Therefore median income in Detroit is much lower than the suburbs. Without a good number of middle class residents, business will not invest either. You also are implying, like many on this board, that the city is somehow subsidizing suburban development. This is not the case. (Message edited by perfectgentleman on March 12, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 179 Registered: 04-2006 |
I understand everything you mentioned, pg, and even thought to myself while typing, "I wonder how many posts after mine it will take for someone to call me a communist?"  I don't mean to sound that way, but I do mean it. Though you may think I'm retarded, my intent is to throw a "curve ball" into the reality of land use in Michigan. That's great that the market dictates "growing" suburbs. I'm not arguing that, because at the same time, a market is dictating the redevelopment of urbanized areas. It works both ways. It seems as though people are biased on a stance on either front. There is something called SMART GROWTH. A term that is only whispered in Michigan. I think we're so use to doing things one way, we're a bit afraid to speak out against the status quo. http://www.smartgrowth.org/ I'm not at all opposed to suburbs. In fact, suburbs are good and we should have them. I was hoping that you or anyone else would have picked up on that when I listed them as communities to refocus our attention on. The fact is, at least in my noncommunist opinion, that the further we push out our land consumption, as it is directly linked to the depopulation of our current economic/metropolitan system, the more expensive it is going to be. Let me make myself clear. THE CITY DOES NOT SUBSIDIZE THE EXURBS, WE ALL DO! Now that we're facing record foreclosures, and a stalled buyers' market, that harsh reality is revealed. Let's not talk about it though. It might upset the developers that invested big dollars in cheap mansions in our bucolic community. Instead, we should all bow down to the almighty L. Brooks and Mr. DeRoche when they proclaim from the heavens, "I REPRESENT SPRAWL! SPRAWL IS GOOD!" Well, in 2007, sprawl is not good. It's good to grow your cities and suburbs, but not at the expense of the rest of the body. As many probably are aware, Portland, Oregon has one of the highest quality of life indeces in the country because the region has chosen to grow smart. On the contrary, Detroit, Michigan is one of the slowest growing regions in the country, yet is consuming alarming amounts of land while it's core is performing extremely poor on many many levels. Read: http://www.metro-region.org/ar ticle.cfm?articleID=277 I'm not saying we put up an urban growth boundary per se, like Portland did. That's pretty intense land use policy, especially for a region as divided as ours to attempt. One way we might meet eye to eye however, would be to agree on a stopping point for the Detroit Water and Sewer Department in extending its infrastructure. Here is another example of how expensive it is for more and more infrastructure to be built to serve less and less density of a population. The current system is nonsustainable. Someday, Flint Township will "grow" at the expense of Macomb Township and Deerfield Township will "boom" at the expense of Milford Township. Just because they are not Detroit, doesn't mean they are exempt from the very same plague that has terrorized Redford and Hazel Park. The future of our state is in our cities. Suburban cities too. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Digitaldom Member Username: Digitaldom Post Number: 605 Registered: 08-2004 |
I voted for Devos for the record.. for several reasons.. But I KNEW that granholm said all those things during her re-election to just get votes.. she was in a hole.. I will say though Devos was not trained well for politics and it showed greatly (or poorly) in the debates.. he had great ideas.. The problem is.. we need a governor that needs to start cutting back... SIMPLE as that! Ohh I don't want to cut back.. I just want to raise taxes.. that is pure BS.. if the population is shrinking.. (HINT DETROIT!) you need to start cutting back.. and get back to reality.. I want to start another thread in a second that is going to be a GREAT debate.. but I will stick to this issue... Smaller government.. lower taxes.. and lower services.. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 690 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: Too late, DWSD already pumps an average of 675 million gallons per day of water to more than four million people in 126 communities within its service area. That service area extends from Mt. Morris in Genesee County to Imlay City in Lapeer County to Burtchville Twp. in St. Clair County to Rockwood in Monroe County and to Pittsfield Twp. in Washtenaw County. Also, since 1996, the DWSD has followed a policy that requires all system infrastructure growth to be self-supporting. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 180 Registered: 04-2006 |
^Thanks for that information, Mike! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 151 Registered: 11-2006 |
Yes, corporations pass taxes onto consumers, however, if one state is proposing a new and higher tax on services, and the other is not...amongst other things, the corporation will choose the more business friendly state. Bearinabox...supporting social security, unions (as they exist today) and regulating business doesn't qualify you as a socialist/collectivist?? If it doesn't, then what does? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5220 Registered: 10-2003 |
Considering how 'socialist' has been made a slur in this country, I'm not sure why you'd be surprised that people wouldn't want to be labeled that. And, if you want to call that socialist, I guess most of the Democratic Party is socialist. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 155 Registered: 11-2006 |
ABSOLUTELY!!! Exactly correct, but you are not just now coming to that realization are you? Even liberals themselves admit to preferring socialists. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5221 Registered: 10-2003 |
You're also using an awfully broad brush. Democrats and Republicans have quite a range on the spectrum. Actually, I'd hardly call Democrats socialist anymore than I'd call Republicans all capitalist. Each may trend more in one direction of the other, but neither is a socialist party or a capitalist party. In fact, I'd say the Democrat's big-tent is far more diverse in ideology on this. (Message edited by lmichigan on March 13, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 123 Registered: 04-2006 |
Today's Democrats would never dream of advocating fully nationalized industry, large-scale income redistribution, or a sufficiently strong social safety net to allow the unemployed to survive, which to me are the defining traits of socialism. The mainstream party line even stops short of taking meaningful steps toward universal health care, which is common to nearly all developed nations with free-market economies. It's a long way from a capitalistic free-market economic structure with a few regulations to socialism. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2401 Registered: 12-2004 |
quote: When the City of Dallas paid Comerica a total of $50.5 million to move 200 jobs there ($252,500 per job - BTW), it was supposed to be an indictment against Governor Granholm and a reason to recall her. We now have 5/3 Bank moving 350 jobs to Detroit and we didn't have to give them any special incentives to get them here. What does that say about the Governor? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2749 Registered: 10-2004 |
Only socialists look to a governor for job creation. What does that make a Nemecek? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 237 Registered: 03-2006 |
Sadly we have been becoming a socialist nation for a long time. Almost 60% of the federal budget is dedicated to entitlement programs, a situation we are all coming to realize is unsustainable. Europe will be the canary in the mine as their situation is far worse. The longer we wait to address these issues, the more brutal the reforms will have to be in the end to avoid a fiscal collapse. Unfortunately liberals derive much of their power from those who are now dependent on (and feel entitled to) government assistance. Sadly the Republicans in Washington DC have succumbed to the pressure and gone native as well. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2404 Registered: 12-2004 |
quote: It makes a Nemecek someone who is wondering why fools like PG and LY are ignoring reality and contradicting themselves. You've argued that Governor Granholm is bad for Michigan's economy. As an example of that, you point to the fact that Michigan is so bad, Texas had to pay Comerica $50.5 million to leave Detroit. Why, I wonder, would Texas have to pay them to move if things were so bad here? You then ignore the fact that 5/3 Bank moved jobs to the area without any government agency having to pay them anything. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2752 Registered: 10-2004 |
Comerica would eventually have left anyway. When will you socialists ever realize that your views and policies on business and economics suck as far as the private sector is concerned? Let me put it another way. The whores on Michigan Avenue went south to where their business interests were better, say Vernor, during those years when Michigan was single-lane and their Johns could not stop. If you want to say the Comerica execs are whores, so be it, but they work in their and their stockholders interests. Eventually, their last employees will turn off the lights in Michigan and go on from there. And Granholm had nothing directly to do with Comerica leaving. It's Michigan's dysfunctional tax-and-spend (socialist?) economy, which has been in recession (or worse) all this decade so far. (Message edited by livernoisyard on March 13, 2007) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2753 Registered: 10-2004 |
quote: Sweden recently voted conservatives into high office for the first time in two or three human generations because their socialist government and economy are becoming untenable and in danger of internal self-collapse. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5618 Registered: 02-2004 |
Granholm went to Germany to bring over 500 to 5,000 jobs here to Michigan YAY!!!!! She is staying the course. She said that in five years, you'll going to be blown away. Granholm cannot be recalled. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2757 Registered: 10-2004 |
Just like Paul W. Smith said on WJR this morning about her junket in Germany: It helps, but there would still be over 350,000 unemployed wannabe workers in the state. Those approximately 2000 new jobs would make up about 1/20 of 1% of the total unemployed in the state. During her re-election campaign, she once bragged about bringing two new jobs to Michigan. That wouldn't even come close to making up for the job losses attributed to that one particular day alone. But bringing jobs to Michigan is not her job. Running the state government in such a manner as to not take even more out of the private-sector's economy should be her main job. She's already the highest-spending governor in Michigan's history, yet she claims to have cut state spending. Total BS. Just check the actual numbers! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 158 Registered: 11-2006 |
She had to do something, if for no reason other than to appear to care and be working to save the states economy. It would have been much easier if she hadn't mucked it up in the first place though. What are her goals? Money and Power via votes. Being a democrat, the vision is to grow government (at the expense of individual freedom) create a growing number of impoverished dependants on her bloated government who have no choice but to vote for her (and her party) in order to survive. Pretty nifty trick. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2763 Registered: 10-2004 |
As was mentioned a few times earlier, she and Duggan were McNarama's personal attorneys doing whoever knows what for one of Michigan's most corrupt politicians. If my memory holds, the FBI already raided one or some of those offices and removed their computers a couple years back for some reason or another. That isn't an everyday experience. What's next for her? Congresswoman or senator? Federal prosecutor? Judge? Hope not. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cinderpath Member Username: Cinderpath Post Number: 47 Registered: 05-2006 |
How can any nutwad on this list possibly state that Republicans reduce the size of government and spending???? Looking at Bush, he has expanded the deficit and size of government to its largest in history. Anyone with a brain realizes this. Granholm simply inherited the debt Fat Boy Engler left behind. Republicans= Borrow and spend. At least Democrats make an effort to pay for things, as opposed pawning it off for others pay, then gripe when it cost more because we are now paying interest on the debt. I think it would help the Republicans on this list if they bothered to take a class on Finance and accounting, and economics 101= When you borrow money, it cost more. Welcome to the time to pay the piper for the Engler era. Just wait 'till we get the bill for all the idiots that voted for Bush get to pay for Iraq for next 3 generations. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 993 Registered: 08-2006 |
I wouldn't blame her for the state of the state's economy. It's not her politics which are the problem. Wisconsin and Illinois both have democratic governors, both have strong economies and growing populations. Both of those states are old industrial states. Michigan has to work hard at transitioning out of industry. Education has to become a priority. Encourage people to think of Michigan as a world leader in research. Research and technology has been great to Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago. Those cities have made the transition. It's time for Michigan to do likewise. I see no point to recalling Granholm. Do you really want state government to get tied up with recalling her rather than working on solving the current problems. If you guys didn't want her, then you shouldn't have voted for her 5 months ago. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 182 Registered: 04-2006 |
That whole 5 years blown away crap is getting so old. Everytime I hear it, I can't help but envision DeVos' ugly face on the body of a teddy bear that was made in China. Good grief! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz Post Number: 1697 Registered: 12-2005 |
One thing that strikes me about "tax and spend" versus "borrow and spend" is that many of those who would have to repay the borrowed loan cannot yet vote on the matter. Something about taxation without representation comes to mind. Are we seriously considering ghoulishly feeding off of innocent children? Shame, shame, shame. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ccbatson Member Username: Ccbatson Post Number: 161 Registered: 11-2006 |
Sadly, I must agree that Republicans are not delivering on the promise of shrinking government (half of their core platform in most peoples opinion). I have no good rebuttal to that assertion (but wish I had). Maybe we will see a resurgance of fiscally conservative candidates that are electable...I know, dream on. As I have explained however, the lesser of 2 evils (still evil) is all that we have left. Borrowing is part of our economy, and it ebbs and flows. It is not the doomsday issue that you are making it out to be, but, I agree (again) less spending is desperately needed. Don't get me started on Duggan.....the Darth Vader to Granholms' Emperor Palpatine....If so, maybe Duggan will turn on her and bring back balance....LOL. |
