Why is Rand Paul Wrong on Detroit?

on that note wrote:

Rick wrote:

on that note wrote: So he is suggesting progressive taxation? This is not sounding new.

It is called the wealthy bailing out or financing the wants of the poor.

Rather than asking everyone to pony up more taxes we can't afford so those folks can stay there, perhaps they could start a public information campaign to educated people about themselves. You see if people understood they are animals and not plants, then they will be liberated to move across the landscape as animals have done throughout time to find resources. Perhaps if they just air that Gold Rush show on discovery, the people will see that sometimes you have to pick up and move temporarily or forever to get what you need....Pa on Little House did both.

Or we could finance everyone to maintain their archaic lifestyles for all of time, while simultaneously making them both impractical and illegal.

Not sure where you got that from... I read it REDUCING taxes drastically and eliminating the capital gains taxes to draw in more businesses. Not sure where you got the progressive part.

Rick this is pretty simple. You said it yourself, reduce taxes in Detroit to draw in more businesses and give people more to spend. You would do this because this area is depressed and poor. You will have to tax other areas that are not depressed or as poor more to finance this. .

I disagree. I'm talking about attracting new businesses who will pay a lower tax as an incentive to invest in the area. Why would others need to be taxed more to fund businesses who are funding themselves? Without new business coming in, the are ZERO new jobs, ZERO new revenues, ZERO new growth. Capitalism creates wealth if you allow it to.

Rick and Rand, consider this, why are we doing anything to bring back the failed social experiments of the Democrats like Detroit?
Suppose Rand's plan works out and the economy comes back, the same voters who messed up the first time will continue to vote for corrupt mayors and council members.
Time to cut and run. Stop feeding the cess pool.

I think Obama is the only president of recent times that does not have major blame for this. This had to do with pumping up the real estate market. Upper class poor and lower middle class (the two groups both effected by this and posting about it here) simply fell for the trap, did not protect themselves and borrowed to much. Those who collect unemployment are the opposite of the people that are like historic winners that move to find their resources. They stay and say whoa as me and ask everyone around them to pay them for a little while why they or the community adjust to their employment desires. Hard working, smart folks don't dig in too deep and are ready to move to stay successful.

Esp today, we have cars and the like to move real easy. Lot's of people commute into cities, smaller version of the same. They are not dumb, they are smart. Now if you borrow too much money, esp for your home, you can trap yourself into the I need unemployment and people to help me vs. going to where everyone already knows there is more to be had. Borrowing too much makes you less independent and mobile. The presidents prior to Obama encouraged people to borrow too much. Obama is no saint, and has certainly made sure this goes on and on, but he did not invent the process by any means.

In regards to your last comment, pretty practical, but still looks at Detroit as an entity of its own rather than a collection of people. Detroit just needs to become a smaller town as people vacate. Once it is a small town, you can talk about it like many other small towns, not at all. The town will be better and the people that move will be better. Of course it is up to them, but I would move for far less.

New Orleans is a good example of this, after Katrina, many of these people moved to other communities. A lot of these people had never lived anywhere else, well, most of them haven't moved back and New Orleans hasn't returned to pre-hurricane population levels.