As a Detroiter i have pretty mixed feelings about this and id like to hear what other people from Michigan (or anyone really) think about this. According to the article it only took six days to raise $50,000. For a statue. Of a freakin '80s movie character. I think Detroit could use that money for a lot of other more important projects.
What really interests me about this story is the national response to the campaign. much of the money for the statue was raised outside Detroit. Thats a little strange to me. It seems like everyone else in America feels like it would be hilarious to put up a statue of the main character of a movie that took place in a city with insanely exaggerated crime rates. On the other hand, its not our money, and it is kinda funny.
But i still think the money would be better spent in the Detroit Public School system. What do you guys think?
I would totally support this. This is not a waste of money at all. When people come together to do wild things like this, it really raises citizen morale.
The money was donated to see a Robocop statue, it would not have been raised for any other reason. Someone stating that it would be better used somewhere else; is fine and dandy but it was raised for one intention.
ROBOCOP (hopefully they give him the pink pimp car too )
I think that $50,000 is not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things... $50,000 into the public school system would pay for less than a day's salary for the teachers. $50,000 is a drop in a sea... it would make little to no difference to anything that needs the money.
On February 21 2011 01:46 Insanious wrote: I think that $50,000 is not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things... $50,000 into the public school system would pay for less than a day's salary for the teachers. $50,000 is a drop in a sea... it would make little to no difference to anything that needs the money.
So well... statue it up.
Well, it could pay for a single teacher's salary for a year, which admittedly isn't much of an impact. But at the same time, I don't think people would have raised the money so quickly if the overall cost of the project were higher (like Tiger Stadium).
As far as I can tell, the money is coming from private donors and not taxpayers so they can do whatever they want with the money. Maybe it speaks more to the inefficient bureaucracy of Detroit that they were able to raise the money in 6 days from external sources.
I remembered the city as an automotive center. What happened to you, Detroit?
I guess my real issue is that Robocop is kind of a lame choice... who in this city is going to actually feel energized by a statue of Robocop? I'm all in favor of putting up a statue if there is someone or something worth Immortalizing. But Robocop? Come on. There must be more inspirational and more hilarious characters or symbols. This is my favorite statue in Detroit.
On February 21 2011 01:52 SilverLeagueElite wrote: As far as I can tell, the money is coming from private donors and not taxpayers so they can do whatever they want with the money.
If its not in their city I don't think they get to decide what statues to put up. What if Boston raised the money to put up a statue of the Red Sox in New York City? Would it be allowed to go up?
On February 21 2011 01:52 SilverLeagueElite wrote: As far as I can tell, the money is coming from private donors and not taxpayers so they can do whatever they want with the money.
If its not in their city I don't think they get to decide what statues to put up. What if Boston raised the money to put up a statue of the Red Sox in New York City? Would it be allowed to go up?
Edit: Sorry for Double Post.
I personally doubt the donors would have donated if the statue wasn't in Detroit. And it seems the people of Detroit are OK with this so I'm not sure what your point is. I'd image they secured permissions to build it before they started accepting donations.
On February 21 2011 01:52 SilverLeagueElite wrote: As far as I can tell, the money is coming from private donors and not taxpayers so they can do whatever they want with the money.
If its not in their city I don't think they get to decide what statues to put up. What if Boston raised the money to put up a statue of the Red Sox in New York City? Would it be allowed to go up?
Edit: Sorry for Double Post.
I personally doubt the donors would have donated if the statue wasn't in Detroit. And it seems the people of Detroit are OK with this so I'm not sure what your point is. I'd image they secured permissions to build it before they started accepting donations.
Actually, they did start collecting donations before it was ok'ed. Mayor Bing has already said there are no plans to build the statue. My point was that just because its private money doesn't mean they can put up a statue in a city that they don't live in =/. After all, They aren't the ones who will be looking at it, we will.
also: the people of Detroit are not necessarily in favor of it, there is a lively debate going on in our city right now.
On February 21 2011 01:55 Kickboxer wrote: This just might be the best idea in the contemporary history of urban planning. When was the last time something this badass was built?
On February 21 2011 02:34 SilverLeagueElite wrote:
On February 21 2011 02:04 PassiveAce wrote:
On February 21 2011 01:52 SilverLeagueElite wrote: As far as I can tell, the money is coming from private donors and not taxpayers so they can do whatever they want with the money.
If its not in their city I don't think they get to decide what statues to put up. What if Boston raised the money to put up a statue of the Red Sox in New York City? Would it be allowed to go up?
Edit: Sorry for Double Post.
I personally doubt the donors would have donated if the statue wasn't in Detroit. And it seems the people of Detroit are OK with this so I'm not sure what your point is. I'd image they secured permissions to build it before they started accepting donations.
Actually, they did start collecting donations before it was ok'ed. Mayor Bing has already said there are no plans to build the statue. My point was that just because its private money doesn't mean they can put up a statue in a city that they don't live in =/. After all, They aren't the ones who will be looking at it, we will.
also: the people of Detroit are not necessarily in favor of it, there is a lively debate going on in our city right now.
That being the case, I can imagine how local people see it as being an eye sore. Not everyone is a fan of sci-fi heroes.
Public schools get enough money as it is, they need to just spend it correctly and up the teacher pay alot. Also I think it's pretty retarded that they raised $50,000 in a week to erect a statue of Robocop before it's even OK'd to be put up. What happens if it gets denied? If it does goes up thats the most awesome thing I've seen. Apart from the 5story gundam in Japan lol.
Saw a bit in the article that talked about if 'crazy' people were crazy enough to throw some money for something outlandish like this- that they're capable of doing grander things; interesting reasoning. Only time will tell if something will come out of this.
the money could NOT go to better uses. throwing 50,000 grand at some random thing in detroit will not help anything. detroit isnt a hell hole because we need an extra 50k. its a hell hole because crime has rotted the city out to the core. generally in major citys this is offset by artsy types and yupies embracing this as "character" untill once again the run down turns into the place to be. but detroit has a very small urban culture. something like this robocop would defenitely add some much needed lightheartedness and artsy-ness to are our so serious post apocolyptic car manufacturing wasteland. imho the only good things in detroit are; heilderburg project, funknight, and demf/hoedown. we need more of this type of culture if we want to ever rebuild detroit. these kinds of things attract the sort of people that can revive a run down neighborhood into a cool neighborhood.
edit- i forgot, i believe the proposed site for this statue is in front of the old train station. pretty much a mecca for aspiring artists in michigan.
I've only spent a fleeting amount of time in Detroit, but it sure seemed to be every bit the hellhole everyone makes it out to be. As trite as it sounds, Detroit having a Robocop statue actually does make me feel a little better about the city. Sure, you're not solving any problems with that money, but a small morale/image boost for the city is a nice thing to have too. Plus it's not taxpayer money anyway.
On February 21 2011 01:25 PassiveAce wrote: But i still think the money would be better spent in the Detroit Public School system. What do you guys think?
Yeah , im sure 50,000 will help Detroit ALOT..... Maybe instead of bailing out the banksters with 700Billion if that money had been invested in world class R&D and manufacturing facilities in Detroit?
Sure there are better things for that money to go but fact is it wasn't raised with your tax money as a citizen of Chicago it was raised from other places and it's unethical to take other people's money when they were promised a certain action to arise from receiving the money. You going behind their backs to spend it on a school system or subway system is akin to embezzlement or something.
50k for a statue? sounds like a rip off if anything. school systems getting money doesn't help even if it was a million dollars (this has been shown over and over again). The system just needs to be reworked, we gotta copy europe. But yea seems kind of ridiculous, guess it just goes to show that america is just commercialized and wastes money.
I actually remember watching the special features on the RoboCop DVD. Everyone complained about how much of an asshole Peter Weller was and how difficult the production was. The director finished off the interview with "I will never do this again".
Kind of ruined my child hood memories of this movie ... Damn you DVD and your damned special features.
On February 21 2011 01:46 Insanious wrote: I think that $50,000 is not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things... $50,000 into the public school system would pay for less than a day's salary for the teachers. $50,000 is a drop in a sea... it would make little to no difference to anything that needs the money.
So well... statue it up.
This is pretty much what I was gonna say. And also, who doesn't want a statue of Robocop?
50k for a statue of ROBOCOP? I honestly dont believe this shit. Whats next 100k for a statue of terminator? Or wait! Replace the statue of liberty with optimus prime? Lol! Rediculous. What a collosal waste of money.
On February 21 2011 01:27 Chairman Ray wrote: I would totally support this. This is not a waste of money at all. When people come together to do wild things like this, it really raises citizen morale.
Whatever floats your boat I guess. If people want to raise $50,000 for a statue of RoboCop, then go right ahead.
Conversely, it's quite ridiculous that charities and certain fields of scientific research are crying out for funding; yet we would sooner think to raise $50,000 and spend it on a fucking Robocop statue.
On February 21 2011 01:55 Kickboxer wrote: This just might be the best idea in the contemporary history of urban planning. When was the last time something this badass was built?
Well, tourist attractions usually give back to the city in revenue received from said tourists. So $50,000 from the private sector to put up a tourist attraction isn't that bad of an Idea, given that it successfully attracts tourists that is.
Good luck trying to get the private sector to fund money for anything that is really the government's responsibility (as quickly as this statue anyway). They're better off funding a campaign for a governor to improve the school systems and put tax money where it belongs.
so... why not?
Edit: Overall, Detroit will need many more tourist attractions to give tourists incentive to visit their city over other cities like say... Philadelphia, Boston or New York City... but this statue could be a step in the right direction.
Imho it would be pretty badass to have a statue of that kind, but in a size of more than 7 feet.
If you feel bad about the money which is used for art, you can pretty much stop spending on everything concerning free time. No theatre, music, books, ... because "something" better could be done with the money. (like feeding the poor, giving shelter to the homeless, researching cures to illnesses, ...)
So i guess the important point is: Would people like it and would they appreciate the sight of it? Would it make people happy? Would you personally enjoy the look? Thats what an investment into a statue like this is about, and this is what you have to ask yourself / your fellow citizens.
Meanwhile, Detroit has to close half its public schools to close a budget gap.
...and children are starving in Africa. What's your point?
Yes, in an ideal world, the money spent on entertainment would be put to better use elsewhere, but guess what? People like spending money on things they enjoy. Can you fault them for that?
On February 21 2011 01:55 Kickboxer wrote: This just might be the best idea in the contemporary history of urban planning. When was the last time something this badass was built?
LOL is this somewhere in Japan, it's so fucking awesome! If the Robocop statue looks half as bad-ass as this it would definitely worth it. And for all the people saying that the money can be spend on better things, why don't you guys start a fund and raise money for whatever you believe would be better?
Meanwhile, Detroit has to close half its public schools to close a budget gap.
...and children are starving in Africa. What's your point?
Yes, in an ideal world, the money spent on entertainment would be put to better use elsewhere, but guess what? People like spending money on things they enjoy. Can you fault them for that?
Ironically, the "justice" system and the majority of laws are supposed to be shaping society into an ideal one. If everybody did not steal, if everybody did not murder; then society would become more "ideal". And so we should pursue such perfection.
Because we are not perfect; and we are not ideal, our day to day decisions reflect this. (I.e In this case - the spending of money). However, just because we don't live in an ideal society with ideal citizens does not justify poor decisions. It merely explains why it happens.
To excuse poor decisions on the basis of nobody being perfect is stupid argument to make.
At the end of the day, it's a free country (Hahaha); thus they can do as they wish with their money. Best of luck to them, and I hope the statue is worth every penny to them.
Meanwhile, Detroit has to close half its public schools to close a budget gap.
...and children are starving in Africa. What's your point?
dude kids are starving in africa because they just dont have the economy/infrastructure/education to do anything lasting or meaningful about it. Not because they build expensive statues of useless bullshit albeit from public funding.
Does this make sense?
Oh shit our education system is going down the shitter, and our kids will probably grow up to be uneducated and resort to crime to survive but hey at least they will have a statue of ROBOCOP from a movie they will probably laugh at to keep them happy.
Fuck people. Who cares about robocop when your citizens have bigger shit to worry about? Like your kids not being able to read.
dude kids are starving in africa because they just dont have the economy/infrastructure/education to do anything lasting or meaningful about it. Not because they build expensive statues of useless bullshit albeit from public funding.
Kids are starving in Africa because of corrupt officials that spend the aid money on guns and goons. I don't see how this is different to the erection of any other statue , the fact it is being paid for through private funding is a bonus.
On February 23 2011 19:46 Jswizzy wrote: You know a statue of Robocop seems stupid at first but it could help with tourism and that would help the local economy.
this could just be me but if i ever had to travel to the USA, with tourist attractions like uhm, i dunno Washington DC, NYC, the grand canyon, Las Vegas etc. why would any foreigner wanting to visit America spend their hard earned money to go to a stereotypically shitty part of the country (you can thank eminem and friends later) to go see a statue of robocop?
Maybe if the dude was real and died heroically while fighting osama bin laden and the green goblin i would understand.
On February 23 2011 19:46 Jswizzy wrote: You know a statue of Robocop seems stupid at first but it could help with tourism and that would help the local economy.
this could just be me but if i ever had to travel to the USA, with tourist attractions like uhm, i dunno Washington DC, NYC, the grand canyon, Las Vegas etc. why would any foreigner wanting to visit America spend their hard earned money to go to a stereotypically shitty part of the country (you can thank eminem and friends later) to go see a statue of robocop?
Maybe if the dude was real and died heroically while fighting osama bin laden and the green goblin i would understand.
Robocop? I cant get over how funny this is
+1. I lol'd.
Fuck the The Statue of Liberty, I'm gonna see a life size statue of Robocop. Gogo Detroit tourism!
On February 21 2011 01:56 stroggos wrote: that's strange, i didn't think americans had a sense of humor that coincides with that of verhoeven films.
They don't. They like the movie, but they take it at face value, not as satire. Same thing if you talk to them about Starship Troopers.
Not everyone in America is that stereotypical you know, but I guess I can't talk I interact with people all the time who think Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim.
Meanwhile, Detroit has to close half its public schools to close a budget gap.
...and children are starving in Africa. What's your point?
Yes, in an ideal world, the money spent on entertainment would be put to better use elsewhere, but guess what? People like spending money on things they enjoy. Can you fault them for that?
If you can't find fault in selfish hedonism and short-sighted behavior, what's left to find fault in?
dude kids are starving in africa because they just dont have the economy/infrastructure/education to do anything lasting or meaningful about it. Not because they build expensive statues of useless bullshit albeit from public funding.
Kids are starving in Africa because of corrupt officials that spend the aid money on guns and goons. I don't see how this is different to the erection of any other statue , the fact it is being paid for through private funding is a bonus.
1. Which countries? 2. Since im african i think i know a tad more. 3. Wasting money on guns on a statue or on guns is wasting money. 4. Aid isnt given to dictators, but to people aiding in relief efforts.
Everyone who is complaining about how schools are in disarray should DO something about it, not just complain about how a Robocop statue is taking away from educational funding (even though it's not).
How would you like it if every time you went to buy groceries, they told you, "No, sorry, you can't buy this, it's all going to starving children halfway around the globe," leaving you with an empty grocery bin and an emptier wallet? You would probably get pissed, even if it's the "right" thing to do. Stop trying to dictate what people do with their money based on your own moral scale -- it's their money and they every right to spend it on what they want, even somehing as hilarious/stupid/wasteful/awesome as a Robocop statue.
If your bitching about people donating a couple of dollars to a robocop statue (yes, I know one guy donated 25k but he had different reasons) when they could of given that money to starving children or un-educated youths then I hope you're all cancelling your internet and selling on your copies of starcraft 2 because otherwise you have no basis to disaprove.
On February 23 2011 21:44 pandaminion wrote: Everyone who is complaining about how schools are in disarray should DO something about it, not just complain about how a Robocop statue is taking away from educational funding (even though it's not).
How would you like it if every time you went to buy groceries, they told you, "No, sorry, you can't buy this, it's all going to starving children halfway around the globe," leaving you with an empty grocery bin and an emptier wallet? You would probably get pissed, even if it's the "right" thing to do. Stop trying to dictate what people do with their money based on your own moral scale -- it's their money and they every right to spend it on what they want, even somehing as hilarious/stupid/wasteful/awesome as a Robocop statue.
Is there not a big difference in necessity between buying groceries and spending $50,000 on a RoboCop statue? Is there any relevance between silly spending and somebody taking your groceries after you've purchased them and sending them away? How would this be the right thing to do?
Do you know what the word comparison or analogy means and how to make sense when attempting to make one?
There is a difference between dictating to people and having an opinion on whether the money was well spent.
This money was privately raised, so nobody can really complain about it being wasted. People are selfish, and would rather have a statue of robocop than help their society. If you don't like it, well, there's nothing you can do about it, because it's universally true. You're selfish too. You could be spending your money that goes to luxuries, like the internet, on starving kids in africa or your own public school system.
This article is definitely the highlight of my day. It's a shame that if it goes up, it'll only be a few days before Robocop is tragically shot (again) for wearing the wrong colors in Detroit.
This reminds me of when they put a statue of William Wallace, in Mel Gibson's, likeness at the crag(start of the climb to the Wallace monument). Some guy from Brechen I think cut it from stone and leased it to Stirling council, lets just say we were not happy lol.
On February 23 2011 22:13 goiflin wrote: This money was privately raised, so nobody can really complain about it being wasted. People are selfish, and would rather have a statue of robocop than help their society. If you don't like it, well, there's nothing you can do about it, because it's universally true. You're selfish too. You could be spending your money that goes to luxuries, like the internet, on starving kids in africa or your own public school system.
This.
I think the idea is cool and I don't really remember the movies that well.
Robocop 2 was like the most awesome movie for any boy from 5-13, go watch it for nostalgia's sake if you are in your 20's.
The Gundam statue is a different story, it's made by the company that sells its line of toys and anime series. Gundam is huge in Asia so it was a worthwhile promotion.
Robocop statue would be awesome. Imagine this posture, looking pretty badass. No bad guy would want to go near it. And if it's privately donated I don't see a problem with it, kinda.
On February 23 2011 19:46 Jswizzy wrote: You know a statue of Robocop seems stupid at first but it could help with tourism and that would help the local economy.
this could just be me but if i ever had to travel to the USA, with tourist attractions like uhm, i dunno Washington DC, NYC, the grand canyon, Las Vegas etc. why would any foreigner wanting to visit America spend their hard earned money to go to a stereotypically shitty part of the country (you can thank eminem and friends later) to go see a statue of robocop?
Maybe if the dude was real and died heroically while fighting osama bin laden and the green goblin i would understand.
Robocop? I cant get over how funny this is
Have you ever heard of Rocky? And Philadelphia? They have a Rocky statue beside the "Rocky stairs" and even footprints where Rocky stood at the top. Thats a preeeetty popular place.
I support it! The arguement "It could have been used for something better" could be used on a million things and is just another form of the slippery slope arguement. What's done is done, enjoy how badass it is.
When I think about statues in different cities they have some kind of meaning and/or remind you of the past. At first sight a statue of an action movie figure seems unnecessary. But on second sight it's a sad but true reflection of the present of a city like Detroit.
This project will seem less "unreasonable" to most, once you realize that giving that fundraiser money to any arm of the government or public would be an even bigger colossal waste. We know that the public either pisses away the funds on sillier nonsense or it goes up some bureaucrat's nose. Anything that inspires people in a small, safe, and inoffensive way is worth more than pouring it into a failed venture like US public education.
On February 21 2011 01:25 PassiveAce wrote: But i still think the money would be better spent in the Detroit Public School system. What do you guys think?
Meanwhile, Detroit has to close half its public schools to close a budget gap.
Expected to raise average class size to 60. Scary stuff.
Also, the idea that a statue of robocop would Attract tourists is a little over the top to me. I don't think anyone from another state or country is going to decide to go see detroit because of a new statue, but if people did, I could see how it would pay for itself. If any of you do come by, send me a pm and wel play some SC at my place
On February 24 2011 03:35 ckw wrote: Maybe this is a good idea, now all I need to do is get California to build a 20 story statue of Arnold slaying the Predator.
Sticking a giant thumbs up in the bay and putting red lights in the water would be 100x better
On February 24 2011 03:35 ckw wrote: Maybe this is a good idea, now all I need to do is get California to build a 20 story statue of Arnold slaying the Predator.
Sticking a giant thumbs up in the bay and putting red lights in the water would be 100x better
It's not fair, California has like 50 different things they could make funny statues of, and so does New York and Chicago.
I've lived in the metro Detroit area my whole life, and the city isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be/how bad it was 10-15 years ago. People are willing to donate to something like this because it's just a one time donation that goes to something that can only have a positive effect on the city (I can't imagine people being angry about the Rocky statue or something like that). Things like raising $50k for DPS or any public system aren't sustainable since those donations that are needed are required on a yearly basis. If anything, this could improve the morale of some people, and everyone knows that we need that in the city wherever we can get it.
Guys, its NEVER going to happen. In Detroit we have a big ass statue of Joe Louis fist, another statue of Joe Louis himself (though not outdoors) and another called the "Spirit of the Detroit" that would make a Robocop statue look just like it is, a joke.
Joe Louis' fist
Spirit of Detroit
A lot of us dont need, or want, a goddamn Robocop statue. All it would do is ruin the architecture.
I'm from Detroit and I think it'd be pretty cool. But it depends where they put it, and how big it is. Like the poster above me said, we already have kickass monuments, that are big, and they actually mean something.
Then again, we have statues of General Custer, too. :\
Philadelphia has the statue of Rocky, and he's fictional. They also have important historical statuary. I guess it all depends on your tastes.
I'd be all for it. It'd be cool and would probably raise morale. We kind of need it after seeing videos of our city council operate.
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
On February 24 2011 07:19 Helios.Star wrote: Guys, its NEVER going to happen. In Detroit we have a big ass statue of Joe Louis fist, another statue of Joe Louis himself (though not outdoors) and another called the "Spirit of the Detroit" that would make a Robocop statue look just like it is, a joke.
Joe Louis' fist
Spirit of Detroit
A lot of us dont need, or want, a goddamn Robocop statue. All it would do is ruin the architecture.
I Love Joe Louis' fist, every time I go down Jefferson I stare at it.
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
ya man, robocop and vomiting toddler giving everyone the finger, good comparison.
All this nonsense about money could be put to better use makes me laugh so bad.
The detroit budget for 2009 was $3.7 billion. $ 2.9 billion in 2010. What the hell can you do with $50,000 to improve on anything? It's a very very small amount of money. The money was raised for the sole purpose of building Robocop stuatue which otherwise wouldn't have raised. Who defines 'better' use?
Can you collect money from the customer in Newsagency trying to buy gossip magazine and give the customer newspaper instead and say 'your money could be used for better purchase?'
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
ya man, robocop and vomiting toddler giving everyone the finger, good comparison.
A big statue of robocop is exactly like a big middle finger to the city in the eyes of some people if you really think about how the movies portray Detroit, and considering the classic architecture/statues we already have. You know what I used was an extreme example to prove my point, could you really not see that or did you just have to respond to my post?
On February 24 2011 08:48 zev318 wrote: damn this would make me wanna go visit detroit
On February 24 2011 08:41 Helios.Star wrote:
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
ya man, robocop and vomiting toddler giving everyone the finger, good comparison.
A big statue of robocop is exactly like a big middle finger to the city in the eyes of some people if you really think about how the movies portray Detroit, and considering the classic architecture/statues we already have. You know what I used was an extreme example to prove my point, could you really not see that or did you just have to respond to my post?
I fail to see the relevance as well. Robocop is a historic icon from the world-wide hit movie who served and protected the citizens of Detroit and eliminated the rampant crime in the city streets. Sure the movie may have over-exaggerated about the city crime scene, but all hollywood movies are like that for dramatic effect. Who's gullible enough to believe everything they see on the movies? Robocop is cool if nothing else. Who's more aknowledged better world-wide than Robocop from Detroit? Tim Allen?
How is it exactly a big middle finger to the city? It's not like it's going to be displayed with the classic architecture/statues side to side. Should the city only have classic or artistic statues?
What you're saying is like saying if the city has concert hall dedicated to classic music, you cannot have hiphop club somewhere? What has vomiting toddler have to do with anything? Is she/he acknowledged world-wide for his/her heroic actions?
On February 24 2011 08:48 zev318 wrote: damn this would make me wanna go visit detroit
On February 24 2011 08:41 Helios.Star wrote:
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
ya man, robocop and vomiting toddler giving everyone the finger, good comparison.
A big statue of robocop is exactly like a big middle finger to the city in the eyes of some people if you really think about how the movies portray Detroit, and considering the classic architecture/statues we already have. You know what I used was an extreme example to prove my point, could you really not see that or did you just have to respond to my post?
I fail to see the relevance as well. Robocop is a historic icon from the world-wide hit movie who served and protected the citizens of Detroit and eliminated the rampant crime in the city streets. Sure the movie may have over-exaggerated about the city crime scene, but all hollywood movies are like that for dramatic effect. Who's gullible enough to believe everything they see on the movies? Robocop is cool if nothing else. Who's more aknowledged better world-wide than Robocop from Detroit? Tim Allen?
How is it exactly a big middle finger to the city? It's not like it's going to be displayed with the classic architecture/statues side to side. Should the city only have classic or artistic statues?
What you're saying is like saying if the city has concert hall dedicated to classic music, you cannot have hiphop club somewhere? What has vomiting toddler have to do with anything? Is she/he acknowledged world-wide for his/her heroic actions?
You obviously failed to see the point I was trying to make also, which is that it isnt true that people can do whatever they want with their money, like everybody is saying. How about if i put up a statue of a vomiting Steve-O from jackass? Or a statue of one of the members of their cast performing the "poo volcano". Theyre all famous, so its ok right?
Are you from Detroit? Michigan? Have you ever been here? The movies make the city look like an absolute crime ridden shithole, and building a statue dedicated to the main character of a movie like that doesn't do the it any favors. The citizens of the city, or the state even, didn't vote for a Robocop statue, and it seems like it was done more as a joke than anything else.
Robocop is NOT a historic icon for the city of Detroit, I really don't know where you get that from. Someone like Joe Louis is, which is why we have two statues of him here. Ernie Harwell is, which is why we have a statue of him going into Comerica Park. You say people aren't gullible enough to believe what they say in movies, but all Ive seen about Detroit on these boards are comments about how crappy of a city it is, or how crime ridden it is, or how there are only "shootings and burned out buildings" (a quote taken directly from a GSL cast), and I guarantee less than 5% of those people have even stepped foot in the city let alone lived here for almost 27 years like myself, and people like you end up believing Robocop represents Detroit. Nobody wants to put up statues of Motown singers around the city but when people hear Robocop they jump on it. Its shameful.
On February 24 2011 08:48 zev318 wrote: damn this would make me wanna go visit detroit
On February 24 2011 08:41 Helios.Star wrote:
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
ya man, robocop and vomiting toddler giving everyone the finger, good comparison.
A big statue of robocop is exactly like a big middle finger to the city in the eyes of some people if you really think about how the movies portray Detroit, and considering the classic architecture/statues we already have. You know what I used was an extreme example to prove my point, could you really not see that or did you just have to respond to my post?
I fail to see the relevance as well. Robocop is a historic icon from the world-wide hit movie who served and protected the citizens of Detroit and eliminated the rampant crime in the city streets. Sure the movie may have over-exaggerated about the city crime scene, but all hollywood movies are like that for dramatic effect. Who's gullible enough to believe everything they see on the movies? Robocop is cool if nothing else. Who's more aknowledged better world-wide than Robocop from Detroit? Tim Allen?
How is it exactly a big middle finger to the city? It's not like it's going to be displayed with the classic architecture/statues side to side. Should the city only have classic or artistic statues?
What you're saying is like saying if the city has concert hall dedicated to classic music, you cannot have hiphop club somewhere? What has vomiting toddler have to do with anything? Is she/he acknowledged world-wide for his/her heroic actions?
You obviously failed to see the point I was trying to make also, which is that it isnt true that people can do whatever they want with their money, like everybody is saying. How about if i put up a statue of a vomiting Steve-O from jackass? Or a statue of one of the members of their cast performing the "poo volcano". Theyre all famous, so its ok right?
Are you from Detroit? Michigan? Have you ever been here? The movies make the city look like an absolute crime ridden shithole, and building a statue dedicated to the main character of a movie like that doesn't do the it any favors. The citizens of the city, or the state even, didn't vote for a Robocop statue, and it seems like it was done more as a joke than anything else.
Robocop is NOT a historic icon for the city of Detroit, I really don't know where you get that from. Someone like Joe Louis is, which is why we have two statues of him here. Ernie Harwell is, which is why we have a statue of him going into Comerica Park. You say people aren't gullible enough to believe what they say in movies, but all Ive seen about Detroit on these boards are comments about how crappy of a city it is, or how crime ridden it is, or how there are only "shootings and burned out buildings" (a quote taken directly from a GSL cast), and I guarantee less than 5% of those people have even stepped foot in the city let alone lived here for almost 27 years like myself, and people like you end up believing Robocop represents Detroit. Nobody wants to put up statues of Motown singers around the city but when people hear Robocop they jump on it. Its shameful.
99% of the world population does not give a shit about Ernie Harwell and don't even know who he is. Joe Louis is more recognizable, but still not as much as Robocop.
The truth is, people don't give a shit about Detroit in general. At least this made to the headlines and people read about it and that itself is worth far more than $50,000 in terms of promotion effect. People would not travel to Detroit just to see the statue of Ernie Harwell but some might actually make an effort to see the statue of Robocop.
[edit] According to 2007 sources, Detroit had the sixth highest number of violent crimes among the twenty-five largest cities. It's probably not the most dangerous city in the US but it's not the safe heaven you seem to believe either.
On February 24 2011 08:48 zev318 wrote: damn this would make me wanna go visit detroit
On February 24 2011 08:41 Helios.Star wrote:
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
ya man, robocop and vomiting toddler giving everyone the finger, good comparison.
A big statue of robocop is exactly like a big middle finger to the city in the eyes of some people if you really think about how the movies portray Detroit, and considering the classic architecture/statues we already have. You know what I used was an extreme example to prove my point, could you really not see that or did you just have to respond to my post?
I fail to see the relevance as well. Robocop is a historic icon from the world-wide hit movie who served and protected the citizens of Detroit and eliminated the rampant crime in the city streets. Sure the movie may have over-exaggerated about the city crime scene, but all hollywood movies are like that for dramatic effect. Who's gullible enough to believe everything they see on the movies? Robocop is cool if nothing else. Who's more aknowledged better world-wide than Robocop from Detroit? Tim Allen?
How is it exactly a big middle finger to the city? It's not like it's going to be displayed with the classic architecture/statues side to side. Should the city only have classic or artistic statues?
What you're saying is like saying if the city has concert hall dedicated to classic music, you cannot have hiphop club somewhere? What has vomiting toddler have to do with anything? Is she/he acknowledged world-wide for his/her heroic actions?
You obviously failed to see the point I was trying to make also, which is that it isnt true that people can do whatever they want with their money, like everybody is saying. How about if i put up a statue of a vomiting Steve-O from jackass? Or a statue of one of the members of their cast performing the "poo volcano". Theyre all famous, so its ok right?
Are you from Detroit? Michigan? Have you ever been here? The movies make the city look like an absolute crime ridden shithole, and building a statue dedicated to the main character of a movie like that doesn't do the it any favors. The citizens of the city, or the state even, didn't vote for a Robocop statue, and it seems like it was done more as a joke than anything else.
Robocop is NOT a historic icon for the city of Detroit, I really don't know where you get that from. Someone like Joe Louis is, which is why we have two statues of him here. Ernie Harwell is, which is why we have a statue of him going into Comerica Park. You say people aren't gullible enough to believe what they say in movies, but all Ive seen about Detroit on these boards are comments about how crappy of a city it is, or how crime ridden it is, or how there are only "shootings and burned out buildings" (a quote taken directly from a GSL cast), and I guarantee less than 5% of those people have even stepped foot in the city let alone lived here for almost 27 years like myself, and people like you end up believing Robocop represents Detroit. Nobody wants to put up statues of Motown singers around the city but when people hear Robocop they jump on it. Its shameful.
99% of the world population does not give a shit about Ernie Harwell and don't even know who he is. Joe Louis is more recognizable, but still not as much as Robocop.
The truth is, people don't give a shit about Detroit in general. At least this made to the headlines and people read about it and that itself is worth far more than $50,000 in terms of promotion effect. People would not travel to Detroit just to see the statue of Ernie Harwell but some might actually make an effort to see the statue of Robocop.
[edit] According to 2007 sources, Detroit had the sixth highest number of violent crimes among the twenty-five largest cities. It's probably not the most dangerous city in the US but it's not the safe heaven you seem to believe either.
I never claimed it was a safe haven, no large city is, but thank you for putting words in my mouth. If you think Robocop is a more historic figure than Joe Louis than you are an idiot, theres no other way to put it.
People don't give a shit about Detroit? I guess thats why we got all that cash to save the auto industry, because whether or not you want to believe it if Detroit falls the rest of the country will follow behind. The rest of the world isnt supposed to give a shit about Ernie Harwell, only the city and the state need to, but what the people of Detroit DONT give a shit about is Robocop, which is why we haven't put a statue of him up. We don't care that people don't travel here to see a statue of Ernie or Joe Louis fist because its for the citizens of the city not tourists. Theyve come for the casinos, the superbowl, the mbl all star game, the nba finals, and the nhl finals, Robocop is definitely not going to be a larger draw.
On February 25 2011 10:14 PassiveAce wrote: You make some very fair points Helios, but ad hominim attacks completely ruin your argument
Meh, the only "attacks" (though there was only one if you could call it that) I did was call someone an idiot for stating as fact that Robocop is more of an icon for the city of Detroit than Joe Louis, and honestly I felt like it was relevant to what I was saying and still don't believe I'm not far off. Nobody gets called out for saying people don't give a shit about the city though, or its icons. But I may just resurrecting a dead thread at this point and I'm done checking back, may it rest in peace. Thanks for recognizing the point(s) I was trying to make though.
What is the piece of land like? The article says it's the "derelict Michigan Central train station." Is it some out-of-the-way tiny POS nobdoy cares about? Where the statue is going is what really matters. Although I suppose if they do build it, someone could sneak it wherever later.
So many people in this thread did not notice that half of the 50k came from a business (Y u no read?!). The company isn't supporting Robocop because it is a benevolent effect for the people of Detriot. They bought publicity.
Rocky in Philadelphia is also being thrown around as an example of a fake-character statue success, but it isn't all good (in the hood). Racism is a major problem in Philadelphia. You will remember that Philadelphia is where Mumia Abu Jamal was wrongfully put on death row. So there is a statue of a fake white boxer from a movie, and no statues of any number of the real black boxers to have really come from Philadelphia. It was also moved around several times because not everyone likes it.
Robocop isn't even a "good" character like Rocky is. Robocop is a product of an evil mega-corporation. That is literally a product, like what you buy from the store. They took Peter Weller's body against his will and made him a cyborg slave. Really, with transhumanism, crime, evil corporations, etc. on the rise, the least likely thing we'll see "in the near future" from this movie is the impossible happy ending.
The idea of statues is to project some kind of influence on the people who live around it. I can't imagine any positive influence Robocop would exert. Anything funny is ultimately apathetic and cynical, in my opinion.
I'll admit it was a little funny (at first), but Robocop isn't real, it isn't decent, and it's from Hollywood. What is to like?
On February 25 2011 10:14 PassiveAce wrote: You make some very fair points Helios, but ad hominim attacks completely ruin your argument
Meh, the only "attacks" (though there was only one if you could call it that) I did was call someone an idiot for stating as fact that Robocop is more of an icon for the city of Detroit than Joe Louis, and honestly I felt like it was relevant to what I was saying and still don't believe I'm not far off. Nobody gets called out for saying people don't give a shit about the city though, or its icons. But I may just resurrecting a dead thread at this point and I'm done checking back, may it rest in peace. Thanks for recognizing the point(s) I was trying to make though.
When did I say Robocop is more of a historic icon than Joe Louis? I only said Robocop is more acknowledged world wide than Joe Louis, because of the hollywood influence and largely due to the fact that Joe Louis's peak was in 1934. It's also true that Transformers is more acknowledged world wide compared to Babe Ruth, but that does not make Transformer more historic figure than Babe Ruth.
Why do you bring up Superbowl, mbl and the nba finals? It's totally irrelveant. So are you saying additional tourists will hurt the Detroit industry? It's like saying because you already getting paid 150K annually as a salary, you would refuse a 10K bonus in the holiday season?
On February 24 2011 07:48 Parnage wrote: So how could anyone complain about this?
It's 50,000k raised by private means(ie no tax money) to build a statue in a city on presumably private property and all it takes is a city saying "oh okay sure".
Sense when was it okay to tell people what they can and can not do with money they make? It's not the cities money to spend nor is it anyone elses but those who donated for this purpose willingly. No case can be made for misspent taxpayers dollars nor can you tell people what to do with the money they make.
The only reason it's being taken in any manner but "oh neat" is because Detroit can't do it themselves due to misuse of budget, corruption, and rising criminal rates. Not to mention the city is outright de-urbanizing.
I used to live in Michigan. Detroit won't be doomed or saved by a statue but it's nice to see some people care enough to actually try and spruce up the place.
Im going to raise $100,000 to buy property and get a 30 ft rainbow colored statue of a violently vomiting toddler giving everybody the finger built right across the street from where you live. Its my money, so you cant tell me I get to do with it. When you build something that affects other people then those in charge do get to say how you spend your money. And I would hardly call a statue of Robocop sprucing up the city.
sprucing up the city isn't exactly a requirement when you're going before the zoning board. Deliberately trying to offend a bunch of people would probably not fly though!!
On February 25 2011 20:20 Chancho wrote: What is the piece of land like? The article says it's the "derelict Michigan Central train station." Is it some out-of-the-way tiny POS nobdoy cares about? Where the statue is going is what really matters. Although I suppose if they do build it, someone could sneak it wherever later.
So many people in this thread did not notice that half of the 50k came from a business (Y u no read?!). The company isn't supporting Robocop because it is a benevolent effect for the people of Detriot. They bought publicity.
Rocky in Philadelphia is also being thrown around as an example of a fake-character statue success, but it isn't all good (in the hood). Racism is a major problem in Philadelphia. You will remember that Philadelphia is where Mumia Abu Jamal was wrongfully put on death row. So there is a statue of a fake white boxer from a movie, and no statues of any number of the real black boxers to have really come from Philadelphia. It was also moved around several times because not everyone likes it.
Robocop isn't even a "good" character like Rocky is. Robocop is a product of an evil mega-corporation. That is literally a product, like what you buy from the store. They took Peter Weller's body against his will and made him a cyborg slave. Really, with transhumanism, crime, evil corporations, etc. on the rise, the least likely thing we'll see "in the near future" from this movie is the impossible happy ending.
The idea of statues is to project some kind of influence on the people who live around it. I can't imagine any positive influence Robocop would exert. Anything funny is ultimately apathetic and cynical, in my opinion.
I'll admit it was a little funny (at first), but Robocop isn't real, it isn't decent, and it's from Hollywood. What is to like?
The beginning of Eminem's music video for Beautiful was filmed there, it is an increadible old building that was built in 1913, but hasn't been occupied since 1988. It is in pretty bad shape, but people in the area see it as a pretty iconic building. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgT1AidzRWM I really dont see the point of the statue tho
Also Helios, Detroit has some of the highest violent crime rates in the US for a large city, not to mention that the education system there is the worst of any large city in the country(Very recent news story). Detroit has done everything in its power to earn the perception it has from the rest of the world.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Gu7k7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam08868.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam4230.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam41441.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam4196c.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam4958.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam-statue-12.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gundam09023.jpg)
... Damn you DVD and your damned special features.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/1zzyR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://voiceofdetroit.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Joe-Louis-fist-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://rlv.zcache.com/spirit_of_detroit_poster-p228312995159682099t5ta_400.jpg)
