[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Although Detroit's tax base was initially reduced because of white flight, Detroit failed to make corresponding reductions in their taxation levels, which prompted a further reduction in the tax base.

I don't think that the initial cause giving rise to the reduction in the tax base is what is instructive to other cities; rather, I think the lesson is that taxation levels must be appropriate to the tax base and the level of government services to be provided.

In that respect, I find the whole argument of "an additional X% isn't THAT much more money, so let's just pay it and get on with our life" rather weak, because the issue isn't simply what X% is, but rather whether X% is sustainable, supportable, in line with the services to be provided actually cost, and reasonably equivalent to what the increase in cost for other goods and services are (as well as equal to what the increase in incomes to pay the X% is).




I suppose that it would depend on how long oil was at $10/bbl and what actions the Fort MacMurray city council did in response to the price reduction.

This is a pretty simplistic and incorrect view of why Detroit fell into bankruptcy. There are pretty good arguments that the policies as promoted by Cal Wenzel and others are the direct issue with Detroit. I highly recommend this article:

http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2...l#.UmbGS1Csh8E

Detroit, an American Autopsy

Our local governments are going broke. And I'm not just talking about the Harrisburgs, San Bernardinos and Detroits. I'm talking about basically all of them, the only possible exceptions being a handful of anomalies I'm simply not confident lumping in with the rest (NYC, DC and SF being the primary ones). The rest are clearly "all in" on the Suburban Experiment to one extent or another, fully committed to maintaining miles and miles of unproductive STROADs, sewer systems and water lines for an asteroid belt of strip malls, big boxes and sheetrock palaces surrounding a downtown dependent on direct subsidies and a sea of asphalt parking for a subsistence existence.

The process here is pretty clear. In the name of growth and efficiency, cities embrace the auto oriented pattern of development. This weakens the bonds of the traditional neighborhoods, changing the value paradigm from being one of neighborhood vitality to one of automobile mobility. Now the most valuable places are the ones with the most stuff, the biggest parking lot and the quickest in/out time. Let this approach simmer for a generation and the community, with the support of zoning codes, will segregate into pods based on income and level of affluence.

Now you have the recipe for full decline. As the second life cycle of the Suburban Experiment kicks in, more growth and a little debt is used to make ends meet. Declining neighborhoods are gradually written off as being places where "those people" live, and they just don't have the same ethics and values as the rest of us. (By the way, identifying "those people" transcends race as I see the same labeling of the disadvantaged here in my 99.5% Caucasian community.) This all makes it easier to divert precious resources to growing (read: affluent) neighborhoods and neglect the others.

As those declining neighborhoods continue to grow as a percentage of the community, we try heroic interventions. Perhaps we build a stadium or label something an entertainment district. Maybe we simply tear down buildings and pay someone a subsidy to come in and rebuild something less offensive. Either way, the decline continues because the vitality and natural mechanisms for maturing have been sucked out of the neighborhoods and what has replaced them on the periphery is not financially viable. The clock is ticking.

Eventually the affluent coalesce in a handful of neighborhoods. Where they are outside of the city limits, the collapse of the place may accelerate, but even when these wealthy neighborhoods are within, one type of corruption (mob or gang style) is simply replaced with another (crony). Police and fire cutbacks. Reductions in park budgets. Public buildings in decline. Streets that are in such disrepair they are essentially abandoned.