The mayor of Detroit has a plan that would cut off all services to 20% of the city. It’s sort of a lengthy article but worth the read. The author describes the problems in Detroit. He lists a few of the root causes but I think he fails to see the main cause for Detroit’s decline over the last 30 years. His only solution seems to be bankruptcy
How would an Ancap or Libertarian address Detroit’s problems?
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/12/detroit-mayor-plans-to-halt-garbage.html
Do you mean an ancap dictator? Because otherwise, the question doesn’t make much sense.
How would an entrepreneur address this problem, maybe?
Uhm, I think that is the point. They can’t, because there is a dictator in place.
The only thing you can do, let them face the material consequences of their actions and hope they “get religion” afterwards. You can do nothing else in the present, be it argue or change policy in a left of center culture. That said, I don’t think Detroit is a lost cause, it still has some things going for it (perhaps being the first major city in this recession to hit rock bottom may be one of her advantages).
@Will, I’m from a suburb of Flint, Michigan and the only three cities in the United States that I can think of worse than Flint are probably Saginaw, MI; Detroit, MI; and Oakland, CA.
Do you mean an ancap dictator? Because otherwise, the question doesn’t make much sense.
I’m not sure what you mean here. Are you saying an Anarcho capitalist would have to change his ideals and become a dictator, the ultimate statist to address these problems?
Suppose you live and own property in an area of Detroit that will be deprived of state run police and fire and sanitation services. Would you form a civilian militia of like minded residents to provide security? Would you form a volunteer fire dept? Would you use venture capital to form private companies that would provide these services to residents for a fee? Or would you simply abandon your property and move somewhere else and live happily ever after under the umbrella of the state. It worked so well for Detroit until it didn’t.
I didn’t evacuate for Katrina. After the storm and for the next 3 and a half months my neighbors and I had no police, fire , sanitation services or electricity. The area I live in is heavily wooded and sparsely populated. My neighbors and I cleared 5 miles of debris mostly mature pines just to reach the highway. Once it was possible we took turns driving 90 miles to get fuel for our generators. Almost every house had a sign posted “we shoot looters”. We could have abandoned our property to the looters but we chose not to. I personally didn’t take a nickle of FEMA money. I believe it is entirely possible for Detroit to rise from the ashes without a dictator.
@Will, I’m from a suburb of Flint, Michigan and the only three cities in the United States that I can think of worse than Flint are probably Saginaw, MI; Detroit, MI; and Oakland, CA.
And I am from Toledo, and have lived in both Detroit and Ann Arbor for about 3 years. I know the area, and I know how bad it is. Maybe I was doing some wishful thinking, homer flag waving, as I still do love the city and think it is one of the cooler places IF you know what you are doing.
That said Flint, Gary, and maybe even Youngstown are all worse than Detroit. And Toledo isn’t much better, and I can’t comment on Saginaw, as I have been there maybe once. Besides that, many of the suburbs of Detroit are quite all right. I think when looking at “rust belt” type cities it is perhaps more important to look at the suburbs than the actual city.
Also, Detroit does now have chunks of cheap land and potential for the film industry. And I still hold to the fact that if the economy gets bad enough soon enough in Detroit it may “get religion” out of sheer necessity. This isn’t so far fetched; while the government may love the auto industry, it would sooner let that go to hell at this point than any of her other pet projects: be it California, New York, the military, welfare, or social security, education, etc.
“Would you form a civilian militia of like minded residents to provide security? Would you form a volunteer fire dept? Would you use venture capital to form private companies that would provide these services to residents for a fee?”
Would the local government allow you to do that? Regardless of whether they will provide services to the area…allowing you to do those things is another seperate issue.
dp
I grew up in Detroit, though no longer reside there. The problems that Detroit faces are far greater than anyone realizes, including most Michiganders. If you visited Detroit, you would think that some foreign power invaded and bombed the whole city. It’s straight out of some zombie-induced post-apocalyptic wasteland. If someone wanted to shoot a movie based on the Apocalypse, then they wouldn’t even need to create a set; just shoot the movie in Detroit. It’s a shame really. The city was the envy of the Western world 60 years ago. It was representative of great arts, culture, work ethic, architecture, and much more. Today, murderers run rampant. Shootings are a common occurrence. The 911 line is often “busy.” People get mugged just so their shoes can be taken.
Detroit is a perfect example of the “gimme gimme” mentality and failed government. The state and federal government, along with the unions, corrupt politicians (tautological, I know) and an apathetic population have destroyed the “Paris of the West.” Most Detroiters have given up on public police protection
When I suggest to locals that Detroit should privatize everything, they respond by saying, “but then we’ll have lawlessness, no public services, and chaos.” It’s a bit rich…
The way the OP was setup presumed that an individual can do anything about societal problems. The only way an individual can do that, would be to have complete control, like a dictator.
Libertarians and ancaps can only accomplish social goals through voluntary action. So the only answer about what a libertarian or anarchist could do is, to find opportunities to trade and organize peacefully.
The “get things done” mentality is the root of statism. There is no “plan” or “tactic” that can turn things around.
Detroit will only get better when the people of Detroit reject violence and choose the market.
Would the local government allow you to do that? Regardless of whether they will provide services to the area…allowing you to do those things is another separate issue.
They’d do all they could to stop you from challenging their monopoly on the use of force. They can’t spare the manpower to protect theses citizens. But they would probably find the manpower to intimidate them and keep them from trying to protect themselves. However in order to do that they would have to syphon the manpower from the areas that they still offer "protection " to making these areas less safe. Then these residents would have to choose between an ineffective and coercive local government and other options. The biggest threat to big government is anarchy. The biggest threat to the average citizen is big government.
How would an Ancap or Libertarian address Detroit’s problems?
Move.
I go to school in Detroit… The taxes are high, government services are poor, and there seems to be no respect of property rights. Detroit’s main problem is the central planner mentality. If the legal restrictions on building/renovating and buying new land were removed, then the city would be something like 4,000% better. And yes, that’s an actual scientific number that I have arrived at using rigorous logical deduction.
I remember cutting through Michigan to get to Alberta and thinking that it was the dumpiest place I’ve ever been to. I’ve since been to UK, though.