Comments on: Why Washington's billions won't save Michigan http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/why-washingtons-billions-wont-save-michigan/ Tue, 06 Sep 2011 18:31:23 +0000 hourly 1 By: Alfred Boggs http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/why-washingtons-billions-wont-save-michigan/comment-page-1/#comment-1172 Alfred Boggs Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:31:29 +0000 http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/?p=1138#comment-1172 John, I was going back and reading some of the articles from the center and I believe this nails the problem in Michigan reght on the spot. We have leaders in Lansing that are either ignorant to the facts about what they do or are completely spinless to stand up for what is necessary to turn this state around. John, I was going back and reading some of the articles from the center and I believe this nails the problem in Michigan reght on the spot. We have leaders in Lansing that are either ignorant to the facts about what they do or are completely spinless to stand up for what is necessary to turn this state around.

]]> By: John http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/why-washingtons-billions-wont-save-michigan/comment-page-1/#comment-1171 John Sat, 31 Jan 2009 15:13:30 +0000 http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/?p=1138#comment-1171 Thomas Malthus would be proud of Bob. I'm sure he knows that there are some 36 million people in California, now that is crazy due to the growth curve. I argue that, if anything, Michigan's economic development means we need more people. As this country has grown, it has become richer. It's a demand-side story, but I think history brings this out well if you consider the record. As it stands, we're on the brink of a Michigan that risks losing people and economic activity - not pretty. Thomas Malthus would be proud of Bob. I’m sure he knows that there are some 36 million people in California, now that is crazy due to the growth curve.

I argue that, if anything, Michigan’s economic development means we need more people. As this country has grown, it has become richer. It’s a demand-side story, but I think history brings this out well if you consider the record.

As it stands, we’re on the brink of a Michigan that risks losing people and economic activity – not pretty.

]]> By: bob durivage http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/why-washingtons-billions-wont-save-michigan/comment-page-1/#comment-1170 bob durivage Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:39:31 +0000 http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/?p=1138#comment-1170 When are we going to look at the size of our population- all 10 million of us? That's alot of people to take care of. Population is the bottom line to every major problem on this planet and no one is talking about it. Ten million people in one state is unsustainable. Nothing will change for the best until our numbers are dramatically reduced- and I don't mean sending them to other states to be their problem. I mean limiting the size of households. Three children per family will mean eventual poverty for all. Two children will only maintain the status quo. One child per family will reduce our troubles by half- if it is not too late. And if we're not sure about that we should seriously consider a moratorium on child birth. Having children is not a right. It is a privelidge which we have abused. Snip snip. When are we going to look at the size of our population- all 10 million of us? That’s alot of people to take care of.
Population is the bottom line to every major problem on this planet and no one is talking about it. Ten million people in one state is unsustainable. Nothing will change for the best until our numbers are dramatically reduced- and I don’t mean sending them to other states to be their problem. I mean limiting the size of households. Three children per family will mean eventual poverty for all. Two children will only maintain the status quo. One child per family will reduce our troubles by half- if it is not too late. And if we’re not sure about that we should seriously consider a moratorium on child birth. Having children is not a right. It is a privelidge which we have abused.
Snip snip.

]]>