Service shut off for non-payment is "controversial"?

Wasn't sure if you were posting about Detroit water or Ukraine gas.

What's "controversial" about both, really, is that the coffers have been looted by the leadership and the people are expected to pay again for something they already paid for. It's all about diverting the wealth of the city/country into gangster's pockets, loading the place with debt and then using the money you stole to buy the stuff you borrowed against so you can own what the people built. The only reason it's not a crime is because the crooks wrote the laws.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
And what if you don't pay your oxygen bill?
Click to expand...

5370.JPG


Then the tank stays empty :(

but for now the tank is full, because I usually use the plasma torch rather than acetylene torch
 
Last edited:
FluffyMcDeath said:
Wasn't sure if you were posting about Detroit water or Ukraine gas.

What's "controversial" about both, really, is that the coffers have been looted by the leadership and the people are expected to pay again for something they already paid for. It's all about diverting the wealth of the city/country into gangster's pockets, loading the place with debt and then using the money you stole to buy the stuff you borrowed against so you can own what the people built. The only reason it's not a crime is because the crooks wrote the laws.
Click to expand...

Naw.... I just can't see anything controversial in the Detroit water cutoffs, at all. "People are expected to pay again for something they already paid for"?!? How do ya figure? They didn't pay for their water. That's why it was shut off. I'm doubting they paid any of their other bills, either. I can't find the figures, but I expect all the houses that have had water shut off also hadn't paid taxes in at least two years, either...

And it's not like we have expensive water service in Detroit. Hell, it's some of the cheapest in the nation. (I think my water bill was something on the order of $5 last month.) And people are still free to collect rainwater (which is quite common), collect river water (much less so), import water (popular among the rich), or use a drinking fountain (provided by the city or the business it's located at). Back in the day, the city even used to crack open the fire hydrants on hot days and give the kids a public place to play and cool off on the really hot days. Free water, everyone! I don't think they do that very often, anymore, though. You could still walk down to Hart Plaza and jump in the fountain, if you want, though.
 
I think cutting off the water is probably a bad move. Yes people need to pay for what they get, but cutting off the water is likely to create much bigger problems and solve nothing. Here the gas & hydro can't be cut off in the winter months mostly because it would be a death sentence. I know people like to classify people who skip these payments as freeloaders, but most likely there are serious reasons for this lapse. A heavy handed approach isn't likely to get good results. People will start stealing water and the prison system will get a nice boost. Ultimately, tax payers will pay more, not less.
 
Glaucus said:
I think cutting off the water is probably a bad move.
Click to expand...

Well, it probably is... But an interesting thing to remember is that the city of Detroit is going through bankruptcy, still. A lot of questions have been asked about why the Public Works Water Department is running a deficit. And a lot of that is because there are a lot of unpaid bills out there. Bankruptcy restructuring groups start asking questions about why the Department hasn't taken more steps to collect on those bills. Sometimes it's easier and more politically palatable to show them than to try to explain.
 
ilwrath said:
Well, it probably is... But an interesting thing to remember is that the city of Detroit is going through bankruptcy, still. A lot of questions have been asked about why the Public Works Water Department is running a deficit. And a lot of that is because there are a lot of unpaid bills out there. Bankruptcy restructuring groups start asking questions about why the Department hasn't taken more steps to collect on those bills. Sometimes it's easier and more politically palatable to show them than to try to explain.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and that's probably what Fluffy was trying to get at. Are they in debt just because of a bunch of unpaid bills or are there some more serious, and by that I mean criminal, money problems? One great way to deflect that is to get hard and tough with all those who stole water instead of focusing on those who stole boat loads of cash.
 
Glaucus said:
Exactly, and that's probably what Fluffy was trying to get at. Are they in debt just because of a bunch of unpaid bills or are there some more serious, and by that I mean criminal, money problems? One great way to deflect that is to get hard and tough with all those who stole water instead of focusing on those who stole boat loads of cash.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, the Water Department never had enough money to attract any real criminal problems. It likely costs them more to process the water and sewage than they charge, even if everyone paid their bills.

All I can really say is that they've had talks about privatizing the Water Department for more than a decade, now. And every time a private company examines the possible value (they can steal) from that department, they quickly drop the issue and disappear back into the shadows. That kind of tells me that there isn't a lot there to pillage, or it already would have been pillaged. ;)
 
The problem as I see it was the unfairness how they went about it. Some homes were two months in the rears, $150. The Detroit Lions owed $80,000. The State owed $5million. The city could have prioritized based upon the dollars owed.
 
ilwrath said:
All I can really say is that they've had talks about privatizing the Water Department for more than a decade, now. And every time a private company examines the possible value (they can steal) from that department, they quickly drop the issue and disappear back into the shadows. That kind of tells me that there isn't a lot there to pillage, or it already would have been pillaged. ;)
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but it's 4 million customers and water is a necessity of life. Part of the reason it was likely hard to privatize is the debt. A move to repidly eradicate debt and demonstrate strict enforcement would make the operation more attractive to a buyer. Of course, the buyer would still like to buy for next to nothing something the citizens have already paid to build. And once it was private the prices would naturally go up and the shutoffs would be be faster and less humane. That is a legitimate worry because that is what always happens - and the service degrades over time. Very rarely you will get a good water company but in these sort of forced sales you are much more likely to get a vulture who'll pick up the system for pennies, charge what they can get away with spending nothing on maintenance until the whole thing falls apart and goes back to being a public utility that the citizen have to pay to rebuild.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Going after the little guys.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...s-but-not-to-businesses-who-owe-millions.html
Click to expand...

Harris has since come up with $1,100 to have services restored but is having trouble keeping her $180 monthly payment to the water department. On top of that, her home has entered foreclosure because Detroit water bills are rolled into property taxes.
Click to expand...

Detroit! Democratic Paradise!!
$180 a month for water !
That has to include trash or something else bundled with the water bill, that Detroit extorts with the water bill

and rolling delinquent water bills into the property taxes should be illegal

Either city water is a utility or a tax

1) If the water bill is considered a "property tax" then water should never be cut off, because they can just take your entire property once delinquent

2) If the water bill is a utility bill, then it can be cut off, but not collectable as a tax, its an unpaid bill


Seems everyone is protesting because they want Option #1
 
metalman said:
Detroit! Democratic Paradise!!
$180 a month for water !
Click to expand...

Not $180 /mo for water. $180 /mo for payback on back water bills. Likely they hadn't paid for 10 years or more.
The only other way you can possibly run up $180 in a month is to have a broken water main in front of your house, gushing out full pressure 24x7 and not bother to tell anyone.

Truth be told, they don't roll the trucks for checking low pressure... well, ever. You'll find a lot of abandoned houses and buildings with deep basement swimming pools being filled by a broken main around Detroit. Coupled with a several hundred dollar back bill sitting in the mailbox (provided there is still one attached to said building).

That has to include trash or something else bundled with the water bill, that Detroit extorts with the water bill
Click to expand...

Naw, see above.

The Public Works is definitely utility not a tax. As for the collection methods... Both utility and tax are to be paid to the city. But I agree they probably shouldn't arrive on the same statement. But, if my hazy memory serves me correctly, back in the '80's, it went through that the Public Works could turn their unpaid bills over to city collections.
 
Interesting, though that the state that can impose a non-elected official to take over when a municipality is deemed unable to handle its debts is also an institution that owes that municipality. Having the power to impose a debt solution and also having the ability to influence the debt to make it worse is an interesting combination of powers to have.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Water department is back in the mayor's hands.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that... Not a lot to say over it, really. I think it was more just a "here, you deal with it."

This blogger from the NYTimes has the best argument I've seen against the Emergency Manager takeover in Detroit. I think it ultimately fails in that it's not an unelected takeover, at all. We, the people of Michigan, elected Gov. Rick Snyder on the grounds that he'd fix Michigan's budget. He then hired someone to fix the biggest budget problem in the state (Detroit). Yes, that is overriding the elected officials in Detroit. But the larger population of Michigan judged the entire set of elected officials of Detroit to be completely corrupt and dysfunctional, needing removal.

Still, it is a very interesting and well thought-out read.
Detroit’s Drought of Democracy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top