The Klan Plan, a cloaked plot against black people by dreamtrove

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Im going to try and NOT touch this one.

I've seen too much of what happens in a situation like this.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 8:31 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Go for it. I'm with you. If there's anything a non-resident can do from so far away, tell me and I'll do it.

New Orleans is a prime example; the areas where possible were razed and replaced with housing unaffordable by the people who used to live there (benefitting the developers and those backing them); the rest is left a shambles, even this long after Katrina.

It's a typical game; developers are the ones who benefit while the poor get shoved out. What I'd LIKE to see is homes refurbished--much as I know many of you will hate this--at government expense if necessary. FEMA certainly could be called on to help REBUILD what Katrina devastated, in a manner that would make it possible for those who lived there to continue living there. Certainly I don't mean replace shanties with shanties, but to at least make habitable again those homes which were sufficing for people previously, maybe reconstruct them to more modern standards--improving the living circumstances of the poor is one way we can improve the entire country.

Okay, so I'm being as much a dreamer as Wulf, in my way--but I think it would be somewhat doable, rather than razing people's homes to put up things that benefit developers and profit-seekers.

By the way, when it comes to right v. left, to my knowledge it is usually right-wingers who back razing things in favor of "more profitable" development. They have the money, and like the idea of capitalist profits.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 8:34 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Gahhh...

Ok, you move out the poor... the black, the Mexican... they have to go somewhere.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:11 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

Not sure what your plan is but my 2 cents:

1. don't mention race - I would stay away from any group descriptor other than "people."

2. Have numbers of the "perfectly good homes" that would be destroyed and what your definition is for "perfectly good."

3. "We have empty housing, and homeless people. Can't we just directly or indirectly connect the two?" I wouldn't mention this one, it'll seem like you are encouraging homelessness. Just let it go, one crisis at a time.

4. I would leave Chuck's adventures in Israel out of it too - stay focused on the local issue.

5. Most importantly - If you can connect Schumer to any $profit$ from this you have a pretty strong hand.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com Now available on your iPhone

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 10:22 AM

Niki

Thanks, I might need the help.
Theses are not shacks, but pretty nice houses.
The left-right thing is a ringer. The fact that these people are democrats is not relevant. Usually a democrat is a person who lives in an area where a democrat can win an election. Thus they adopt a set of divisive positions so as to get votes. There's no underlying difference between democratic and republican politicians, for the most part (a few exceptions) but mostly, these people are 'politicians.'

Wulf,

No, they move *in*. The destructive forces of mass housing are well known. Trailer parks, housing projects, etc. People need personal space. Anyone who has worked an office cubicle knows the stress of people, some hostile, breathing down your neck. Imagine that 24-7.

Pizmo,

Good advice. I'm not afraid to show the people to paint Schumer as a racist. Not to say so, but to show it. Any appearance of racism is political suicide in NY.

I was stating the Israel/Arab thing as evidence that Schumer might be racially motivated. I wouldn't use it because I know how powerful that lobby is.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 10:23 AM

Quote:
5. Most importantly - If you can connect Schumer to any $profit$ from this you have a pretty strong hand.

This.

But, one place I would disagree with Pizmo is by all means, bring in the race card. I think this one calls for fighting dirty, and might incense the communities and families of those affected by this policy. Plus, using the race card, you might be able to use the one big absolute mother of all contacts you've mentioned you maybe kinda sorta may have an angle to. I guarantee you get the African American base riled up enough, someone's gonna listen. Someone who may have the power to reverse this bullshit.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 10:25 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

What I mean by mo comment was this...

Yeah, gentrification is great. Take a slum, move in, make it better. But those people who used to live there, they have to go somewhere.

So it sets up some sort of game. You ruin an area, we come in, drive you out, and you go someplace else. Then we go THERE, to the place you've moved to and ruined, and the game resets.

We need to do something different.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 11:35 AM

One thought is that many of these families haven't had wealth for multiple generations.

Not relocating them so they can build on what they have might be a good start...

But then again, I haven't ever lived in slums. I don't know if it's even possible to save up wealth in the ghetto, not unless you take up illegal or unsavoury professions. Wulf? What do you think?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 11:42 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Its impossible to save money when you live in a slum. And then, with gentrification, you just shuffle the people out of town.

How does that work?

Especially since the places you shuffle them too, soon turn to slums themselves.

We need to think of a better solution to this stuff.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:00 PM

Then that seems at the most simplest like a two part solution. First, don't relocate, and second, make it so they CAN build on what they have.

Obviously, the second part is the hardest.

I think a factor in the second part may be the problem with the education system in inner cities. It's hard to care about learning information that might better yourself if you're worried about your own survival.

(Though the current education system as a tool for bettering oneself is not QUITE the purpose that TPTB have made it into, but one issue at a time)

Yet, more and more I see that education isn't necessarily a guarantee for work, either, and PAYING for it can be another trap. Hmm.

Trade skills? Making a particular community almost self-sufficient, so they only export products and services?

Perhaps what's needed is incentive for entrepreneural growth in such locations. Local business tends to hire locally, and if youth are hired, they might learn job skills.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:03 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

How about we choose to know that the poorest of us need the most help.

NOT saying that we GIVE fish to the folks. Just that we teach them to fish on their own.

As to those that refuse to lear to fish... well, thats their choice , isn' t it?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:34 PM

I could agree with that. Although I think if you break down the stigma and fear of knowledge that schools are built to instill in students, I think people may be willing to learn useful skills out of curiosity. Then, the hope is, they eventually find something they're good at that they like doing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:37 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

The problem is that inner-city schools are basically prisons. Afraid of those that come with in their halls.

Honestly, I have no idea of what to do about things.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 5:49 PM

Quote:
Yeah, gentrification is great. Take a slum, move in, make it better. But those people who used to live there, they have to go somewhere.

The Alliance has spoken. I mean WTF? Gentrification is a total abuse of govt. power, it's like what Israel does to Gaza. It's obscene. Take someone's home and level it.

Seriously, what the fuck. Aren't you one of the guys who stood up in the 2A thread and said they can't take my home without taking me down first? I mean seriously, don't black people have the same right?

Really really seriously. Black people can't just have their world levelled because some politician has a profit scheme, or for any other reason. Also, I'm beginning to doubt your black neighborhood story, having lived in two of them, these places aren't trashy, they're pretty nice neighborhoods. If they need repair, then repair them. Pull in a community organizer and start fixing up damage to buildings, etc. But honestly, these places I'm talking about specifically, they're not that run down, in fact, they're not run down at all. They're just black.

Quote:

So it sets up some sort of game. You ruin an area, we come in, drive you out, and you go someplace else. Then we go THERE, to the place you've moved to and ruined, and the game resets.

I don't even know what planet this comment came from.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 6:53 PM

Byte

Quote:
Slums. I don't know if it's even possible to save up wealth in the ghetto

Even the language is loaded. "Slums," "ghetto," I said these neighborhoods were black. That's all. Poor, black. Okay. But what image does that bring to mind? I mean the reality is these are pretty nice places. Palestinian homes probably qualify as "poor" by Israeli standards, but Gaza looks pretty nice from what I've seen. Even the third world isn't that third world. I was just commenting a little earlier "Third world looks okay."

Yes, there are slums. I think the pictures I posted of South African townships are slums. Those were created *for* blacks by the apartheid govt. of south africa, and are maintained by the "black" ANC govt. of south africa which if anything is more racist than its predecessor, and I don't mean reverse racist, I mean, they have no intention of helping the people Soweto. So yes. The scenes in Slumdog Millionaire. Those are slums. There are some in Tijuana, too.

Ghetto, like the jewish ghetto, implies a cordoned off area where you are remanded to live. The black "ghettos" in inner cities are pretty similar. Terms like "housing projects" and "red lining" come to mind. Cities said "Here, in these blocks, apartment buildings, low income housing, black people are allowed to live, but not elsewhere." Yes, that's a ghetto.

Sure there's ghetto chic, and it comes from the ghetto.

We're talking here about black neighborhoods. Neighborhoods where black people live. These are places with some pretty nice houses, a lot of space, it's not junk.

Sure, wulf is right, these were not built by black people, but they were inhabited by black people after the black labor took over from the white labor. Post slavery, ex-slaves became the turn of the century "outsourcing." Blacks took the jobs because they would work for lower wages, whites migrated to the suburbs. But in these smaller cities, whites just live in white neighborhoods, which look a lot like black neighborhoods, but they have black people in them.

So, sure, I've lived in black neighborhoods, including Obama's, which is in Chicago, where yes, they had redlining. This could conceivably make it a "ghetto" except that the neighborhood in question, hyde park (include kenwood, woodlawn) were not redlined.

Yeah, crime there was pretty bad in 2007. Critical I would say. I was shot at. A lot of people were. A lot were killed. It's calmed down a lot now because Obama is president. But no one should mistake a crime zone for a slum.

Obama's 'hood

Obama's house

Yeah, so, rich black people live there, but a lot of them. Some not so rich. But anyone living in a city is likely to be richer than around here.

There's a range here

But we're not talking about disasters. Mostly stuff like this

A black ghetto in the US

Another one

Jewish ghetto in Venice

Slums, India

Slums, Kenya

Slums, United States of America

Yes, slums exist, as do ghettos, but let's not assume that an area where black people live is a slum or a ghetto.

Sorry. Not a reprimand, just a correction.

I admit that my image of Utah was:

And not:

Call it even?

The real problem here is that the financial world is fucking with them on the whole real estate issue, part of the subprime nonsense, etc.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 7:02 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
The problem is that inner-city schools are basically prisons. Afraid of those that come with in their halls.

Honestly, I have no idea of what to do about things.

I do - first and foremost, we MUST extend our concept of human rights, of personhood, to children.

I'm not sayin go hands off and let our influence create a lord of the flies situation, but stop TREATING them as prisoners, running the schools like a prison or kennel, stop regarding them as livestock, and start regarding them as what they are, our future heirs.

Thing with respect is you gotta give some to get some, and too damn many administrators give utterly none and then go DEMANDING it, with entirely predictable results to someone with a lick of sense, a collective I do not include most educational personal within whatever.

That's the starting point, and there's plenty more to go from there, and when I have time and an appropriate thread, I can expound at length.

Sure beats bashin folk for admitting the desire but not the means, yes ?

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 8:21 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Um, I was being sarcastic about gentrification being great.

Its not.

ETA: At least in the ways I've seen it done.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:27 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

in re: the OP. This is common practice now. One egregious case happened in I think Cleveland or Indianapolis - home owner property confiscated by Imminent Domain solely to improve the tax-base for the city with a huge building whose developers did not want to pay fair market value for the sole property hold-out. Government won, property holder lost. No surprise to me, you may want to check out the pitfalls there while chosing your strategy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 3:35 AM

DT: Fair enough, but you said people were living in tents in these places and that there's homelessness. I used words that I thought met what you seemed to be describing. Seems like I just misunderstood.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 8:28 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
I think people may be willing to learn useful skills out of curiosity

I see this as a biggie. I know there are some who are so stuck in the kill-or-be-killed mentality that it's impossible to convince them otherwise, or help them move up. But I think there are a LOT of people in places such as have been described who would love to learn a skill they could use.

I'd love to see more trade schools and fewer "schools" as they exist now. Since education is forced--or at least ATTENDANCE is--it's only natural that kids in those areas would bring the mentality of where they live with them. I don't blame the schools so much; you can't MAKE people learn, and when esoteric education has nothing to do with your life, why bother?

If we had people willing to go to areas considered slums and set up trade schools, I'll bet dollars to donuts it would improve things. Only in a small way, but given the enormity of the problem, it's gotta be "baby steps" to get ANYTHING to build on.

I would love to see the government put the money into refurbishing homes rather than allowing developers to tear them down. We have a town called "Marin City". It used to be a mess, and was and still is where most of the Black people live in Marin. Not all, by any means, but things are so expensive here that only upper-middle-class of ANY race can afford most places.

They "gentrified" it, if you will. Cleaned it up, built housing, but housing almost anyone could afford. It wasn't truly what you'd call a "ghetto", we have none of those. The end result is it's one of the loveliest places in Marin...I don't buy at ALL that if you fix a place up, it will get "slummed" all over again; I think people can take pride in where they live if they're given half a chance. Now Marin City is bigger and expanding, and, tho' mainly still Black, is becoming more and more mixed as new housing becomes available which people can afford. And it's lovely; they put in a shopping center with all kinds of shops where there used to be a trashed marsh, and all in all it's very nice.

We have a poorer section out in Santa Venetia. It's mostly white. Also among the least expensive housing in the County. It's okay, but it's not kept up really well.

Then there's Richmond, across the Bay, where violence is prevalent and it's almost entirely Black. But it's decently kept up, would look like a lower-middle-class neighborhood of any kind. And the Canal here in San Rafael, where we lived for a short time when we first came. Also high violence (for Marin!) and not really neat, but decent apartments and it's now become mostly Hispanic...and looks a LOT better than it did when we lived there.

The city took over an air force base when the military moved out of the area, spiffed it up and it became "low-income housing", with subsidies for the poor, etc. It's a mish-mash of cultures all living side by side, and the violence level is minimum.

I firmly believe that, given the chance, most people will make an effort to keep where they live decent. It can't happen, as I see it, when the area is already a slum and there's no opportunity to improve. So something needs to be there that offers opportunity. But razing housing to benefit developers and tax bases is sickening to me. If only there were more incentive to refurbish housing without raising the price of buying in, and offering some alternative to hanging around on the street because there's no employment. JMHO

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 2:46 PM

JSF, good point. I had that thought, and yes, city govt. is part of the problem.

Byte,

It came across as a description of black neighborhoods, I wasn't kicking you, but doing a similar image reality check. The blacks who have been foreclosed on are often living now in some group situation such as charity housing in Syracuse, though many still have their homes, the entire neighborhood is slated for demolition. In Buffalo there are several like this. Schumer wants to destroy 15,000 Buffalo homes, he has something big planned. He only co-sponsor was the Buffalo district representative.

A ghetto or a slum is an ongoing situation. There are tent cities, not here of course, people would freeze, and yes, those will likely become slums.

I thought in general there might be a misconception of the concept of black neighborhood, and I didn't want to target Wulf specifically because I do that too much, but his comment about "they come in and ruin it" didn't jibe with some of these neighborhoods, which are, if not upscale, pretty nice. The crime rate, yes, is high, but it's high in Obama's neighborhood also. Statistically, he would have a point: Crime rates are higher in black neighborhoods. Anyone can care to guess as why that is, but the places we're talking about here, crime rate is about twice state average, about 1/4 of what it would be in a serious inner city environment like detroit or DC.

Nik,

An interesting story, but not what's happening here, and not one I'm familiar with. The properties they have are much nicer than anything that will be created, if anything is created at all. I suspect that new construction will be business to take advantage of the interstate traffic. The city is behind this for the tax revenue.

Also, remember the Hawthorne Effect: People were very happy with the projects when they were first created, because they thought someone was "helping them." Then they more and more begun to realize.

Yes, some of these "Blighted" neighborhoods have repair issues, but this is not because of the people. It's because these properties were foreclosed on and have been traded in commodities and derivatives markets since 2002, and so many have remained unoccupied, which is the reason for the appearance of decay in some properties. As you can see in the pictures, and on google maps pictures, the properties occupied by black people are in very nice shape, because they look after their homes.

The trick here was to take people with limited means, and sell them "a better life" so a lot of families moved to the suburbs on subprime mortgages, and a lot of people moved into these homes from apartments, on mortgages they could not afford. The real estate market was artificially pushed up, raising the taxes. The taxes in the black neighborhoods in syracuse are now averaging about twice mine. I pay $1200 here, similar homes black homes are 2000-3000. This is because of the inflation due to the housing boom, which we didn't have here.

Then when the housing crunch happened, even those who were keeping up with payments got the crunch, because their mortgages were reassessed as "negative equity" because they had purchased homes at $200,000 that now had a market value of $100,000 or less, and the banks were able to call in the balance, according to the contract, forcing people out of their homes. Once empty, the homes became the collateral for derivatives, and it became financially impossible for anyone to move into them.

Add to that Chuck Schumer, and now all the houses are pending demolition.

Meanwhile, derivative traders, who never visit the properties, have not been paying any taxes, and hide the back taxes in secondary tax liens attached to the property. This means that it now costs $20,000 just to move into a condemned property, even if you get it, and then you have to start a battle with a corrupt govt. to not have your house demolished, all the while, derivative traders are holding options on the repossession of the house, and trading those options as if they were stock options.

The whole thing is obscene on so many levels.

These are homes, in a neighborhood, full of people. They're not financial derivatives. People should live in homes, not trade options on them.

I feel similarly about companies. I think shares can work, in a somewhat marxist-capitalism, and stock options are a good way to get shares to the workers. But a company should always be about working to make products and services that benefit society, not derivatives and debt sales, and when that happens in business, we get things like Lehman Brothers, etc.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 25, 2009 3:02 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

DT: You might want to get Habitat for Humanity involved.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 25, 2009 4:56 PM