PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • Ziva Sahl: The NYT’s well knows that the Castro regime has been repressing and murdering dissidents for a half century plus. They...

  • Rayarena: Honey, believe me, I’ve written many-a-letters to the NYTs. And Londoño has a twitter account that people are writing to....

  • Honey: Then write letters to the NTYimes and to CNN and tell them about it.

  • Honey: Now at this Thanksgiving time it is a perfect time to reread Learning to Die in Miami. If you haven’t read it yet, go get a...

  • Ricardo: I thank my lucky star everyday! I hate that “no es facil”, crap I hear from the new Cubans. No brother mas duro es...

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

Burning Down The Burbs in a Second Term

51mJJJw7M2L__SS500_

Main Street vs Wall Street. Main Street. Main Street. Main Street.

It's all we seem to hear about anymore. Obama and the democrats have insisted they are the champions of Main Street. Where is "Main Street"? The cities have "Main Street". That is what makes it "Main". It's the main road that generally runs through the center of town. Stanly Kurtz has written a book, Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities, outlining how Obama's main line of attack is on the nation's suburbs for several reasons. A piece he wrote for National Review Online touches on the subject of his book...

President Obama is not a fan of America’s suburbs. Indeed, he intends to abolish them. With suburban voters set to be the swing constituency of the 2012 election, the administration’s plans for this segment of the electorate deserve scrutiny. Obama is a longtime supporter of “regionalism,” the idea that the suburbs should be folded into the cities, merging schools, housing, transportation, and above all taxation. To this end, the president has already put programs in place designed to push the country toward a sweeping social transformation in a possible second term. The goal: income equalization via a massive redistribution of suburban tax money to the cities.

Obama’s plans to undercut the political and economic independence of America’s suburbs reach back decades. The community organizers who trained him in the mid-1980s blamed the plight of cities on taxpayer “flight” to suburbia. Beginning in the mid-1990s, Obama’s mentors at the Gamaliel Foundation (a community-organizing network Obama helped found) formally dedicated their efforts to the budding fight against suburban “sprawl.” From his positions on the boards of a couple of left-leaning Chicago foundations, Obama channeled substantial financial support to these efforts. On entering politics, he served as a dedicated ally of his mentors’ anti-suburban activism.

The alliance endures. One of Obama’s original trainers, Mike Kruglik, has hived off a new organization called Building One America, which continues Gamaliel’s anti-suburban crusade under another name. Kruglik and his close allies, David Rusk and Myron Orfield, intellectual leaders of the “anti-sprawl” movement, have been quietly working with the Obama administration for years on an ambitious program of social reform.

[...]

One approach is to force suburban residents into densely packed cities by blocking development on the outskirts of metropolitan areas, and by discouraging driving with a blizzard of taxes, fees, and regulations. Step two is to move the poor out of cities by imposing low-income-housing quotas on development in middle-class suburbs. Step three is to export the controversial “regional tax-base sharing” scheme currently in place in the Minneapolis–St. Paul area to the rest of the country. Under this program, a portion of suburban tax money flows into a common regional pot, which is then effectively redistributed to urban, and a few less well-off “inner-ring” suburban, municipalities.

The Obama administration, stocked with “regionalist” appointees, has been advancing this ambitious plan quietly for the past four years. Efforts to discourage driving and to press development into densely packed cities are justified by reference to fears of global warming. Leaders of the crusade against “sprawl” very consciously use environmental concerns as a cover for their redistributive schemes.

The centerpiece of the Obama administration’s anti-suburban plans is a little-known and seemingly modest program called the Sustainable Communities Initiative. The “regional planning grants” funded under this initiative — many of them in battleground states like Florida, Virginia, and Ohio — are set to recommend redistributive policies, as well as transportation and development plans, designed to undercut America’s suburbs. Few have noticed this because the program’s goals are muffled in the impenetrable jargon of “sustainability,” while its recommendations are to be unveiled only in a possible second Obama term.

[...]

Yes, it would be a very "fundamental transformation", wouldn't it? This is why we defend "the rich" ... because once he has picked them bare the bar will be lowered to the next income level ... and the next... Right now "the rich" bar is set at $250K/yr. How soon before you are considered rich? Believe me, if we have learned anything the last few decades, and especially in the last few years, it is that the liberals/left are experts at changing the meanings of words to suit their agenda.

HT: Rush Limbaugh

Comments are closed.