Government Praised for Latest Renewal of South Bronx

[idirtify]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/nyregion/government-cant-help-tell-it-to-the-south-bronx.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion
Government Can’t Help? Tell That to the South Bronx

The article is laying it on thick how this latest renewal is proof that Republicans and conservatives are wrong; that government DOES work. And I’m surprised that I can locate very little commentary opposing this absurd notion. I’m in an off-forum debate, and need some good basic wording refuting the whole idea of: “but the poor could not afford rent without subsidized places like these…if it were left up to the free market, you would have expensive trump towers and they would have nowhere to go”.

[flightlesskiwi]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/nyregion/government-cant-help-tell-it-to-the-south-bronx.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion
Government Can’t Help? Tell That to the South Bronx

The article is laying it on thick how this latest renewal is proof that Republicans and conservatives are wrong; that government DOES work. And I’m surprised that I can locate very little commentary opposing this absurd notion. I’m in an off-forum debate, and need some good basic wording refuting the whole idea of: “but the poor could not afford rent without subsidized places like these…if it were left up to the free market, you would have expensive trump towers and they would have nowhere to go”.

you might want to try reading how "redevelopment" works (how it is funded, and the implications therein). it's quite fascinating:

http://www.redevelopment.com/norby/index.html

[HOLLYWOOD]

How long have "THEY" been redeveloping the Bronx? Hoow much was borrowed money? How much was stolen from the working class and given in crony deals to the politically connected?

Tranfers of wealth... next we'll hear about the NY MTA and the Billions and Billions in federal taxpayer funds and borrowed money to serve one group to reciprocate in votes and donations.

It never changes with government

[flightlesskiwi]

i would also like to point out that the "redevelopment" projects tend to spend double, triple, quadruple what it would cost a free market developer to "redevelop". that's another way the "redeveloper" scammers grow super wealthy.

one way to argue against the "trump tower" crap... with "affordable housing projects" you get slightly above code utilitarian housing at trump tower production prices.

and, a bit contrary to the link i shared, redevelopment isn't just all about "big box" stores, especially with smaller towns/cities. the main street alliance http://mainstreetalliance.org/that is part and parcel of many towns in this country is a devious redevelopment scheme. they have control over tax dollars (via "grants") and they have a huge lobbying effort. in fact, the alliance for main street fairness, well, i'll just include their "tag line": "We are working to close the anti-small business online sales tax loophole."

which really just means: "tax consumer prudence so your little 'main street businesses' that people 'cherish' but fail to shop at because the prices are ridiculous and the service isn't great can stay afloat." lovely.

i'm pretty passionate about this issue because i live in a main street alliance towns (and am active in voicing my opinion). and the overwhelming sentiment by main street business owners: gimme gimme those grants!! it's disgusting.

also look up: metropolitan redevelopment area (insert city name).

warning: if you criticize any "main street revitalization" or MRA plans. you WILL get slammed with all sorts or nonsense. oh, and, be careful if you ever criticize the chamber of commerce. :rolleyes:

and don't forget you have your Industrial Development Corporations (these are all "non-profits" btw) and your city/county Economic Development Councils-- all can reach into city/county/state (and federal via the state) coffers. which translates: all can take money out of your pocket in the name of "(re)development".

i hate local government. :mad:

[aGameOfThrones]

"The government is good at one thing...it knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say 'see if it weren't for the government you wouldn't be able to walk.'"~Harry Browne

[idirtify]

Wow, this is great stuff. I wasn’t aware of most of these nasty details. I mean I knew the basics and that the rest stunk, but now I know why. Debating is so educational! I’m surprised this kind of stuff isn’t discussed more often since it impacts so many so directly. I definitely have people in mind I’m gonna show this info to. Anyway, I’m afraid I can still predict my opponent (whom I have already cornered into this kind of last-resort reply) will reiterate something like “but what about the poor; where will they go?” Sorry to be such a pain, but I need a good retort to that.

[flightlesskiwi]

Wow, this is great stuff. I wasn’t aware of most of these nasty details. I mean I knew the basics and that the rest stunk, but now I know why. Debating is so educational! I’m surprised this kind of stuff isn’t discussed more often since it impacts so many so directly. I definitely have people in mind I’m gonna show this info to. Anyway, I’m afraid I can still predict my opponent (whom I have already cornered into this kind of last-resort reply) will reiterate something like “but what about the poor; where will they go?” Sorry to be such a pain, but I need a good retort to that.

my answer (because i am a christian): Mark 14:7 "“For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them"

the more people look to The State to "care" for the poor, and the more The State steals the earned wealth of the individual, the less motivation and less money individuals have to give in charity to the poor.

it's a sad cycle. The State has become the all-knowing redeemer. let's face it: it is the easy way. progressives can "feel good" that they have "done something" (even though they do it through wealth redistribution) for (the government definition of) "the poor" and individuals who have no real interest in altruism can "feel good" because they have "done something" by "contributing money" (even though it was taken from them through theft-- taxes) to the (government definition of) "poor people."

it takes individual dedication and care (motivation-- sympathy) in order to really, truly, care for the poor... The State promotes neither the individual nor sympathy.

also remember: when the government subsidizes something, you get more of it.

[idirtify]

my answer (because i am a christian): Mark 14:7 "“For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them"

the more people look to The State to "care" for the poor, and the more The State steals the earned wealth of the individual, the less motivation and less money individuals have to give in charity to the poor.

it's a sad cycle. The State has become the all-knowing redeemer. let's face it: it is the easy way. progressives can "feel good" that they have "done something" (even though they do it through wealth redistribution) for (the government definition of) "the poor" and individuals who have no real interest in altruism can "feel good" because they have "done something" by "contributing money" (even though it was taken from them through theft-- taxes) to the (government definition of) "poor people."

it takes individual dedication and care (motivation-- sympathy) in order to really, truly, care for the poor... The State promotes neither the individual nor sympathy.

also remember: when the government subsidizes something, you get more of it.

Oh, that’s great! Just the kind of points I was looking for. And just in time. I mean, I knew that, but for some reason I couldn’t bring it up. Thanks.