However, I remember at least a half a dozen threads blaming the demise of Detroit in democrat policies...as if quality (in the cars they produce(d)) wasn't/isn't a major driver of a company's success. There's plenty of blame to go around
sure, but the cit spending is within the realm of the city council/government
if the businesses were scaling back/failing, and this led to a loss of population/money, the city should have scaled back in kind. this is a great example of how government often refuses to do just that. it's keynes gone wild, where they try to prop up their failing local economy (and the city-government fiefdom) with public funds
it's a different scenario than in say california, where many of the cities in trouble did not follow keynes due to human behavior. during the "good times" (which was basically like 2002-2008) when the cities are supposed to have surpluses and pay down their debts/liabilities, the cities ignored this and gave even greater benefits to public workers to "keep up with the jonses" in the private market. the private market declines, naturally, but the public workers remain "as is" during these down times. this doubles down on the deficit/debt problems
what doesn't help is dishonesty in discussing the issues, which you will find in this The Young Turks
clip, where they blame the banks for the bonds they offered the cities.
blaming business can only get you so far. Detroit has been dealt an economic "Bad hand" since the 70s or so, but instead of accepting this and scaling back, they refused. governments are reactive by nature, so they should have recognized this. this failure to adapt to reality is why detroit is where it is. the economic issues are a factor, but the city government completely failing to adapt to the economic reality led to the bankruptcy
now, on a tangent, the truly scary part about all of this is how fedgov's policies basically fricked detroit hard. if a city is facing private economic collapse, and the people are reliant solely on the private economy for sustenance, then they will move away or congregate in the "manageable" areas. due to fegov, the vast majority of the population that is left in detroit did not have to do this. section 8 allowed them to live most anywhere in a MASSIVE geographic area. they could live off food stamps, welfare, etc without having to adapt to the economic reality. etc etc
the city of detroit was left with a dwindling tax base and a sprawled population that didn't have to face economic realities. not only did this give the city a false sense of population/tax base/power, but it also fricked it in the arse in the end by creating an unmanageable population to manage.