It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive

page: 5
30
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Yeah, it would create work for unemployed people... I know a few people who would go to Flint for a couple months to rebuild neighborhoods and get paid for it. There are so many other options.. buying people's homes so they can bulldoze? Come on.




posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


I have to actually agree with Doc on this one. It is a pretty good idea. I would love to see people shut off of welfare. The end result would be mass riots and lots and lots of burning. (Detroit's pretty used to it so not many would notice)

Then yep, hire these same exact people to come in and get paid to clean up what they destroyed.

It would be a work of art really.

I mean who among you that live around Detroit wouldn't mind seeing parts of cass corridor leveled to the ground? What about the blocks and blocks of empty businesses along Michigan avenue? It depresses me to no end to see these buildings. I feel like I am entering hell every time I go to work.

You know the city council won't do a damn thing so we have to ask the state. Well the state won't do a damn thing either so we are back to Doc's idea.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by jkm1864
 



Well here is a idea.... Take all these homes and use them for a purpose. Don't bull doze them all just certain ones that are in real bad shape. Take middle class families that have lost their homes and transport them into these homes. Make the people sign a contract to upkeep the property and make a requirement that they have a gun on the premises. The problems with crime would eventually go away and the homes could be put to some use and given to people that deserve it. If these people need jobs then have the government make plans to build micro factories that actually produce something of value with very little start up capital. These little factories could after a while be turned over to the people sort of like a coop where the spoils go to the ones that actually do the work instead of the people at the top. You could also give each person a plot of land where they would be required to plant small gardens so the land could also be put to some sort of use and it would move us to a more sustainable society.


Please correct me if I am wrong but isn't that Marxism? I'm just wondering. I'm really not advocating Communism. (although there are a lot of people in Detroit that expect it.)

I just think that the city would improve if you improved the quality of the place that they live. For goodness sake people come to my hotel and think it's a good place to stay. That place is a pit that hookers complain about. I am not even joking.

Detroit needs some serious urban renewal. The place is a cesspool that even Satan would be fearful to tread. I also think EVERYONE in Detroit should be required to be armed. That would decrease crime dramatically.

But you have to get rid of the handout mentality of the people in Detroit. Believe me these people have a handout mentality.

Give them the option to move, if they refuse, cut off all city services to the area and just wait till the house becomes abandoned and let the city take it back and reclaim the land.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   
[edit on 6/14/09 by MoothyKnight]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 01:41 AM
link   
This is happening already where I live, only slowly. As a factory shuts down, each one had it's own little neighborhood that the workers would typically live in, the factory closes, people move away, eventually the factory is torn down, leaving empty houses behind, and then they slowly get burned down, or dilapidate and then get condemed and torn down. Since every major plant we had is now closed, we have seen this process over and over. Only there aren't any new homes being built to accomodate the people who moved away.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   
I repeat this is NOT OBAMA'S IDEA, PLEASE GOOGLE YOUNGSTOWN OHIO 2006. THANK YOU.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Dozens of U.S. cities may be bulldozed in order to survive





In a curious benefit to the environment, dozens of American cities are slated for shrinkage planning in the face of the deep recession and urban flight. Entire neighborhoods could face bulldozers.
With record numbers of unsold homes in cities and surrounding neighborhoods nationwide - particularly in the manufacturing corridors commonly referred to as the "rust belt," plans are in the works to tear down entire neighborhoods and return the land to nature.

www.digitaljournal.com...
--

Interesting to say the least, so when are firing squads shooting from apc going to hit the streets ?

[edit on 14-6-2009 by tristar]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 05:23 AM
link   
ah well, while in some countries this is done openly,

in other countries this is done silently and secretly...




[edit on 14/6/09 by IchiNiSan]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Wow i wish i could have seen into the future when i was going around preaching about how good of a president obama was going to be. not i completely feel like going through and eating my words. I cannot believe that he is even proposing this idea... I wish there was a way to impeach this guy. im sorry to say but i think bush was a better president... how is he able to even accomplish this kind of goal? demolishing neighborhoods and cities?



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
i don't believe in this but wouldn't it be easier for them to just use populations control rid the social security issues as well as water and food depletions although more or less scare mongered and fictitious...although both water and food and seeds are most likely at the brink of an issue.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Kurotachi
 


every leader from now on will be worse than the next because the issues are greater and affect a greater number of ppl now phasing out the middle class as a whole. the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. this has been engineered since the fed was born. although you can't really blame the puppet only the puppet master(s).



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kurotachi
Wow i wish i could have seen into the future when i was going around preaching about how good of a president obama was going to be. not i completely feel like going through and eating my words. I cannot believe that he is even proposing this idea... I wish there was a way to impeach this guy. im sorry to say but i think bush was a better president... how is he able to even accomplish this kind of goal? demolishing neighborhoods and cities?


I'm am not a fan of Obama, trust me. Even I acknowledge that some places in certain cities need to be leveled. Urban sprawl and job migration have turned parts of certain cities into wastelands that can not be rejuvenated in a cost effective manner.

What is your solution to a city that quite honestly is far too big for it's residents and can't really get new residents to move in?

This issue must be dealt with. While it could have political overtones, some type of action is necessary that helps cities deal with the reduced populations in their once far larger cities.


[edit on 14-6-2009 by pavil]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Don't be surprised by anything you hear in the near future. In times past, some of the projections of how things would be in present time, were thought of as predictions from a nut case. The kind of"that could never happen" kind of thing. Well, things we thought would never happen ARE happening. I have been trying to follow a logical progression to what might happen in the near future. It isn't looking too good.
Some of the infrastructure in these smaller towns is surely unsustainable. Bulldozing is probably going to become more of a reality.
Logical conclusion, the razing of large areas in a city make it easier to controll mass populations, and move them to "temporary" containment centers--aka FEMA camps.
Don't believe what they tell you, believe what you see. look for the alterior motive, there's always one there. Do your own reasoning. There is a purpose to it all--CONTROL!!!



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kurotachi
Wow i wish i could have seen into the future when i was going around preaching about how good of a president obama was going to be. not i completely feel like going through and eating my words. I cannot believe that he is even proposing this idea... I wish there was a way to impeach this guy. im sorry to say but i think bush was a better president... how is he able to even accomplish this kind of goal? demolishing neighborhoods and cities?


WHY WHY WHY?

I asked for the source no one can provide it. No one can even say who in the administration talked to this guy. So how can you say "Obama this and Obama that when you have no source?

Secondly, as far as I can see, theres no harm in this, its being hyped up. I live in one of the effected cities and they have been doing this for years. It's not one mans brain child, its not uncommon, its not indicitive of coming martial law, its not a control device. Its bulldozing abandoned homes and making the community NICER.

If I get a chance I'll post some before and after pictures so you can see for yourself.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   
so when the bulldoze your house, do you get a new one free?

or are you homeless now?

if you get a new FREE home, the idea isnt that bad

but if they leave you homeless with 150$ compensation, i think we have a MAJOR problemo

[edit on 14-6-2009 by muzzleflash]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
There are quite a few areas in the D where this could be done, but as a stated earlier, WHY? To what end? These dilapidated areas have been sitting around for over a decade in most cases, so why NOW when money is tight everywhere? It seems pretty illogical to me. These areas aren't really frequented by anyone other than prostitutes and johns, maybe the OCCASIONAL drug dealer.....but trust me, drug dealers are making MONEY so they actually own a house in most cases. There is absolutely no point to doing this at the moment, urbal renewal is NOT going to take place. There are no jobs here, next to no tourism, and i highly doubt if developers would be able to make use of the land and actually get a return at the moment, or within the next decade for that matter. It's a pointless venture in a time when our efforts could be better served elsewhere.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


the article said abandoned houses for those of us with reading comprehension skills.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


the article said abandoned houses for those of us with reading comprehension skills.


lol
i was simply asking because i do not have time to read every freakin article posted on the internet

whats wrong with asking for a summery and /or clarification?

im glad you have all day to read every sentence ever typed, but i do not, that is why i asked for clarification

thanks for setting me straight, i appreciate it

but the personal attack was very rude imo, not that i care, but i thought it would be fair to say that



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


the article said abandoned houses for those of us with reading comprehension skills.

Apparently, you need to brush up on your comprehension skills.


The article in particular talks about cities like Flint. They want to implement this bulldozing scheme in Flint. From the article it states:


Unemployment is now approaching 20 per cent and the total population has almost halved to 110,000.


Umm......sounds like there are still 110,000 people still living there with 80% employment. This scheme does NOT just pick individual abandoned houses, it bulldozes entire cities like Flint. So I guess we the taxpayer will have to pay to relocate the remaining 110,000 people.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
I repeat this is NOT OBAMA'S IDEA, PLEASE GOOGLE YOUNGSTOWN OHIO 2006. THANK YOU.

What does that have to do with the price of cheese?


Obama wants to implement this idea, even though it was not his own, to the entire country. It's irrelevent regarding who came up with the idea.

From the article:

Having outlined his strategy to Barack Obama during the election campaign, Mr Kildee has now been approached by the US government and a group of charities who want him to apply what he has learnt to the rest of the country.


Obama likes and wants to push this crap nationwide.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join