AHC: Save Detroit

...so you want to force people who don't live somewhere to be forced to pay taxes into it one the grounds that they used to live there.

That seems like a rather dangerous precedent.

Easily enough done if you get some sort of regional government authorities going early enough. Maybe as an answer to the Depression or a post WWII plan. It may either be passed on the assumption that Detroit will be the dominant core of the region (only to have later events reverse the positions) or because Detroit's leadership sees a relative decline coming and wants to spread the costs of metro area services among all the communities in the area.

You need a "sweet spot" where the suburbs think they are setting themselves up for the better end of the deal, while Detroit recognizes that things are going to be shifting in such a way that the city will end up being on the needing/receiving end. Or some serendipitous wording of the legislation that ends up applying from suburb to city as much as it was expected to apply from city to suburb.

Oops! I been ninja'd.
 
Just throwing it out there, but if in post-war years there was a bit more emphasis on added techs in the cars rather than pure mass production (say, computers, phone in cars for the mass public and the like) this could lead to a "startup" environment centered on the car industry.

The issue with this is that said tech industry is still dependent on the auto industry for its sales. As the auto industry goes down, so will it. You need something that won't be tied to auto sales to act as a counter-cyclical industry.

A high tech auto component might eventually lead to technology used elsewhere, but it'll be a difficult beginning. Better to have something not related to the auto industry.
 
It occurred to me having Detroit Aircraft (holding company including what became Lockheed) survive might do it. Except the SoCal weather is so much more amenable to aircraft development, IDK if you don't just prolong the inevitable.

It appears the building of Detroit's "ring" transportation network ended up being less a facilitator than a choke.:eek: Maybe it could be butterflied?
 
It's an idea I personally wouldn't be wholly supportive of but it seemed like the easiest/quickest answer to one of the city's problems. I'm not a local but I've been led to believe that generally what taxes the cities collect they keep whilst what taxes the suburbs collect they keep and never the twain shall meet, which leads to problems if a lot of the population decamps. There's also the question of how much the suburbs and their residents might utilise/take advantage of a city's facilities and attractions in a symbiotic relationship. Sales taxes and business taxes passed on indirectly can help collect funds from those that are just visiting but don't own property but that's a fairly blunt instrument. Basically I'd probably have to do a fair amount of reading on the subject before getting into any major discussion.

What I mean is, a lot of suburbs are distinct legal entities from the cities they are next to. Many for instance on townships townships. Detroit levying taxes on these entities isn't legal.
 
What I mean is, a lot of suburbs are distinct legal entities from the cities they are next to. Many for instance on townships townships. Detroit levying taxes on these entities isn't legal.
Oh yeah, this would definitely have to be at the state legislature level. I wasn't suggesting that Detroit just arbitrarily levy a tax on surrounding municipalities because they felt like it.
 
It appears the building of Detroit's "ring" transportation network ended up being less a facilitator than a choke.:eek: Maybe it could be butterflied?

what and lose those jokes of being able to flood them to make a moat to separate the 'burbs from the rest of Detroit?
 

TinyTartar

Banned
The systemic issues are clear, but thinking recently, how the fuck did Kwame Kilpatrick get elected and reelected as Mayor? Avoid his disastrous tenure and maybe they don't go bankrupt.
 
Top