Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Detroit Free Press)   New study shows that businesses generally don't want to be located in places that are both high in taxes and crime. This surprises some people   (freep.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, Metro Detroit, Detroit, central business district, Quicken Loans, businesses  
•       •       •

3004 clicks; posted to Business » on 18 Apr 2013 at 1:04 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



70 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-18 11:10:14 PM  
Lsherm:
/worst company I've ever worked for
//run by an Indian family whose 8(a) status finally ran out
///they hated black people, asians, and hispanics


Wow, they didn't know how to work the 8(a) system very well. There are some pretty darn big companies out there that just spin off a new subsidiary every time their status is about to run out, and the subsidiary bids the next contract.
 
2013-04-18 11:12:45 PM  
And when businesses set up in regulation-free libertarian wonderlands, the resulting explosion due to lack of safety regulations kills 150 people.
 
2013-04-18 11:20:28 PM  

buzzcut73: Lsherm:
/worst company I've ever worked for
//run by an Indian family whose 8(a) status finally ran out
///they hated black people, asians, and hispanics

Wow, they didn't know how to work the 8(a) system very well. There are some pretty darn big companies out there that just spin off a new subsidiary every time their status is about to run out, and the subsidiary bids the next contract.


No, they did.  There were three members of the family, and they ran a new 8(a) company for all three as each term expired.  Then they ran out of family, and they didn't trust anyone else.  That's when they got into Hubzone.
 
2013-04-18 11:23:48 PM  

GAT_00: JerkyMeat: Yes, they want to set up shop in an unregulated wonderland in a tax subsidized industry with slave labor.

Judging by the incredibly lackluster job growth in Wisconsin once Walker took over, that seems unlikely.


If both parties in this state weren't chasing a moronic vision of making this a manufacturing-based state we might have a chance.  All the eedjits want is the photo-op with the hard hats when they could have taken advantage of UW-Madison's early strides in bio-tech or tried to grow the bunch of regional insurers based here, or half a dozen other sustainable industries.  But no, let's promote the dying sector that hasn't found us appealing since the 60's.  They'll love our "meh" inspiring transportation infrastructure and unpredictable weather.
 
2013-04-18 11:37:32 PM  
The other fun fact is workers who live in a safe suburb and commute to jobs in the city pay a City Tax (1.5 or 2%), yet have no say in how those taxes are used.  I never worked in Detroit proper for that very reason, also crime.

/left 6 or 7 yrs ago
//won't go back until its fixed, so basically never
 
2013-04-18 11:46:55 PM  
One business does.

img832.imageshack.us
 
2013-04-19 12:25:11 AM  
There is a chain of grocery stores in Philadelphia that gets huge tax breaks and other initiatives for opening stores in the city (and recently opened one in a semi-rough part of NJ). They look great when they first open, but then seem to go downhill....high prices, dirty, expired food, etc. And then there are the "customers". Companies try to open stores in these areas, but crime, employee turnover, etc. make it pretty much unprofitable. It's pretty obvious why stores don't want to open in these areas. And we also shouldn't keep handing out tax breaks to people who are pretty much operating/opening glorified bodegas.
 
2013-04-19 12:44:35 AM  
I GUESS THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE A BUSINESS IN AMERICA THEN
 
2013-04-19 01:06:35 AM  

MBZ321: There is a chain of grocery stores in Philadelphia that gets huge tax breaks and other initiatives for opening stores in the city (and recently opened one in a semi-rough part of NJ). They look great when they first open, but then seem to go downhill....high prices, dirty, expired food, etc. And then there are the "customers". Companies try to open stores in these areas, but crime, employee turnover, etc. make it pretty much unprofitable. It's pretty obvious why stores don't want to open in these areas. And we also shouldn't keep handing out tax breaks to people who are pretty much operating/opening glorified bodegas.


Back in the early 90's Safeway's parent company all but pulled out of Washington DC because they couldn't manage to keep stores profitable even if they were the only grocery store within two square miles.  It should have been a slam dunk for them, but at the time crime was so high that the bulk of their thefts were happening before products even reached the shelves due to employee involvement in the thefts.

There's a cutoff point where an area is so hopeless you can't possibly operate a proper business.  Smaller stores proliferate because it's easier to track customers and you can staff the entire thing with people you trust.
 
2013-04-19 05:06:35 AM  

Lsherm: GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.

Federal Government already does it:

http://www.sba.gov/hubzone/


That's enticement, not coercion.
 
2013-04-19 08:31:05 AM  

MBZ321: There is a chain of grocery stores in Philadelphia that gets huge tax breaks and other initiatives for opening stores in the city (and recently opened one in a semi-rough part of NJ). They look great when they first open, but then seem to go downhill....high prices, dirty, expired food, etc. And then there are the "customers". Companies try to open stores in these areas, but crime, employee turnover, etc. make it pretty much unprofitable. It's pretty obvious why stores don't want to open in these areas. And we also shouldn't keep handing out tax breaks to people who are pretty much operating/opening glorified bodegas.


Whole Foods is opening a store in Detroit in June

http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/stores/detroit
 
2013-04-19 09:37:10 AM  

GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.


The only way that is going to happen ("force" not withstanding) is if the city/county goes in and clears the wrecked buildings out first.

For example, I can't see any business taking over the old Packard Plant on Grand: huge industrial complex, sat "empty" for years, nothing but graffiti holding up the walls now, probably cost in the millions to clear the entire facility so that new development could even start.

I don't know, maybe if the entire property was given away AND some sort of realistic incentive was put out to encourage the teardown/redevelopment.  I'm not holding my breath - I don't think you could even convince Dan Gilbert to step in.
 
2013-04-19 10:13:37 AM  

GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.


Congrats on posting the dumbest idea on fark for 4/18/2013.
 
2013-04-19 10:22:53 AM  
Not if it is white collar crime.
 
2013-04-19 11:42:32 AM  

You're the jerk... jerk: GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.

Congrats on posting the dumbest idea on fark for 4/18/2013.


This.

Reading this guy's comments in this thread, I can't tell if he's trolling or just incredibly stupid/naive.

Either way, it saddens and depresses me that some people actually think this way.
 
2013-04-19 11:50:18 AM  

8 inches: Reading this guy's comments in this thread, I can't tell if he's trolling or just incredibly stupid/naive.


That policy would be North Korean level stupid. He must be trolling.
 
2013-04-19 12:02:22 PM  

plc5_250: GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.

The only way that is going to happen ("force" not withstanding) is if the city/county goes in and clears the wrecked buildings out first.

For example, I can't see any business taking over the old Packard Plant on Grand: huge industrial complex, sat "empty" for years, nothing but graffiti holding up the walls now, probably cost in the millions to clear the entire facility so that new development could even start.

I don't know, maybe if the entire property was given away AND some sort of realistic incentive was put out to encourage the teardown/redevelopment.  I'm not holding my breath - I don't think you could even convince Dan Gilbert to step in.


Danny Boy is busy buying up every square inch of ground between the Fisher, Chrysler and Lodge freeways and the river, or at least, the stuff that the Marouns don't already own.

To The Escape Zeppelin!: As with all of the worlds greatest cities, NYC also has the advantage of sitting on the intersection of several major trade routes. NYC doesn't need to attract people, people and goods must come to it. Detroit on the other hand only ever became a major US city because of the decision to put the automotive industry there. Based on its location it should never have been more than a second rate city, like Raleigh or Scranton. Detroit never had much going for it except cars and with the car manufacturing gone there is little reason for businesses to move to Detroit. You have all the high crime and taxes of a major city with none of the advantages.


You really have no idea what you're talking about. There was no "decision" to base the industry in Detroit; the auto industry became identified with Detroit because it had the industrial base and sat on major trade routes and finally, the simple fact that a striking majority of the people who prospered in the early auto business were all from Detroit or nearby.

The Great Lakes made it possible to ship iron ore cheaply from northern Minnesota right up to the factory door, as was done at the Rouge. Coal was easily supplied, via rail, both from local supplies and from Appalachia. You had skilled coach builders and wagon makers all across northern Ohio and Indiana and southern Michigan. Detroit already had an industrial base and led the country in the manufacture of everything from bicycles to cast-iron stoves.

Detroit became the capital of the auto industry precisely because it sat at a central point for trade and industry. It remains a nexus to this day thanks to quirks of geography and the persistence of trade patterns. Today, the bridge at Detroit carries 25 percent of all the trade between the US and Canada. (The railroad tunnel also carries a shiatload of freight.) No, it will never replace Chicago as a hub, and it's unlikely that Detroit will ever get back to its peak population of the 1950s. But Scranton?

Fark you.
 
2013-04-19 04:07:38 PM  
Except when some of these businesses located in low tax areas find it difficult to operate and even lose money because of decrepit crumbling infrastructure due to low taxes.
 
2013-04-19 05:17:49 PM  

ratman999: One business does.

[img832.imageshack.us image 280x280]


They've already took over Detroit; their offices are in Lansing, Columbus, Indianapolis, Washington DC, and elsewhere.  Unfortunately the "Old Man" didn't test well in their focus groups, so they have a friendly representative that reflects the Motor City's character.


The upside is that the Delta City idea has been shot down in one of the few permitted votes by the OCP-controlled state.


GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.


Unfortunately that would leave the Southeast, the leader in corporate theft by government "economic development" agencies, without a single major business left standing. However, it would return the businesses back to their rightful locations north of the Mason-Dixon. It wouldnt be a program of first-choice, which it never should be, but a program of absolute last resort to moot the idea of devastating an area through (a followed-out threat of) relocation.
 
2013-04-19 05:20:26 PM  

You're the jerk... jerk: GoldSpider: Isn't there a way we can force businesses to (re)locate into distressed areas.  That would bring economic opportunity to people who have historically been denied.

Congrats, since I'm the dumbest one on fark as of 4/18/2013.


FTFY, and congrats on making the ignore list. favorited!.
 
Displayed 20 of 70 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report