NY Times Is Very Concerned Over The Housing Apartheid In Big Cities

Interestingly, the NY Times Editorial Board forgets to mention which political Party is currently in charge of most Big Cities, and has been for most of the time since the 1960’s.

Housing Apartheid, American Style

The riots that erupted in Baltimore last month were reminiscent of those that consumed cities all over the country during the 1960s. This rage and unrest was thoroughly explained five decades ago by President Lyndon Johnson’s National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, also known as the Kerner Commission. The commission’s report was released in 1968 — the year that the assassination of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. touched off riots in 125 cities — and contains the most candid indictment of racism and segregation seen in such a document, before or since.

The commission told white Americans what black citizens already knew: that the country was “moving toward two societies, one black, one white — separate and unequal.” It linked the devastating riots that consumed Detroit and Newark in 1967 to residential segregation that had been sustained and made worse by federal policies that concentrated poor black citizens in ghettos. It also said that discrimination and segregation had become a threat to “the future of every American.”

Say, I wonder if anyone took photos of people looting toilet paper, feminine hygiene products, and sneakers back in those riots from the 60’s?

As part of the remedy, the commission called on the government to outlaw housing discrimination in both the sale and rental markets and to “reorient” federal policy so that housing for low- and moderate-income families would be built in integrated, mixed-income neighborhoods, where residents would have better access to jobs and decent schools.

They go on to point out that laws were passed, such as the Fair Housing Act, which outlawed any of those discrimination. Of course, history has shown that when The Government builds housing projects in “mixed-income” neighborhoods, they pretty much become low to virtually no income neighborhoods, with rising levels of crime, violence, drug use and drug dealing, urban blight sets in, housing values and education standards/achievement plummet, and those who can escape do. Witness “Detroit”. And “Baltimore”.

A growing body of evidence suggests that America would be a different country today had the government taken its responsibility seriously. For example, a Harvard study released earlier this month found that young children whose families had been given housing vouchers that allowed them to move to better neighborhoods were more likely to attend college — and to attend better colleges — than those whose families had not received the vouchers. The voucher group also had significantly higher incomes as adults.

I thought liberals hated vouchers? Oh, right, only when it comes to educational choice (see: Teacher’s unions). Of course, what we’ve often seen with the vouchers programs is that the users tend to bring the same crime, violence, poor educational standards, a failure to maintain the homes, etc, to the new neighborhoods (see: Atlanta).

Really, though, this is a big whine about things that happened decades ago, without mentioning who, exactly, has been in charge of these cities, in order to perpetuate a racial meme, whipping people up, rather than bringing people together. Also, as a way to Blamestorm current affairs on The Past, giving an excuse for the lawless and violent behavior.

Even so, this is no excuse to riot. Something we see all too often, and something that seems to be happening more and more. It’s the mob mentality, and the ultimate result of creating a moocher class. You may not like the term, but you can’t dispute it. It is what it is, and it is what we are seeing

The Obama administration has proposed new fair housing enforcement rules, which should be finalized soon, that make states, cities and housing agencies more accountable for furthering fair housing.

But for these rules to be meaningful, the federal government will have to restructure its own programs so that more affordable housing is built in low-poverty, high opportunity neighborhoods. Federal officials must also be willing to do what they have generally been afraid to do in the past — withhold money from communities that perpetuate housing apartheid.

Given what we now know about the pervasive harm that flows from segregation, the country needs to get on with this crucial mission.

So, Obama has failed? Huh.

Interestingly, when those whose ancestors fled the increasingly poor social values in (liberal) big cities move back and create pockets of increased social, economic, and housing capital, we hear about the evils of “gentrification” (see: downtown Detroit). Perhaps the NY Times can tell us why the existing low income housing areas are utter failures, with unbelievably low social, economic, and housing capital? What the Times, and Democrats in general, want to do is export those low values out to the suburbs (especially see: Atlanta, Detroit, which had riots over their voucher programs), rather than fixing the problems in these areas, creating social, economic, and housing capital. They tolerate, even create, the poor quality of life in these areas, and continue to perpetuate these poor conditions with more and more poorly designed programs.

And that’s how we end up with the Baltimore riots, where people loot drug and shoe stores, torch cars, homes, and community centers, throw rocks and stuff at police, drag people out to the street and beat them, and the government not only stands around, but actively encourages this behavior.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Is Very Concerned Over The Housing Apartheid In Big Cities »

The Death Of B.B. King Means We Should Totally Remember Our Original Sin Or Something

In case you missed it, B.B. King, one of the best of the original Blues players ever, passed on. Of course, when we walk down the road into the fever swamps of Leftism, in this case, the always unhinged and insane Salon, we get

B.B. King and our blatant racial revisionism: The South still denies the roots of “America’s music”
Southern states celebrating “America’s music” should remember the direct line between our original sin & the blues

We all have to go sometime. And hopefully, B. B. King was able to reflect in his twilight years that he had lived a longer, greater and more illustrious life than he ever might have imagined when he was born in the cotton fields of the Mississippi Delta back in 1925. He has passed away at the grand old age of 89.

I have found myself listening extensively to the blues over this past year or so. There is not a direct musical connection here to my biography of Wilson Pickett, who went straight from gospel to R&B and soul. But it has helped further inform my understanding of the culture of the deep South, the music that came out of the slavery experience, and how it then traveled, via the Great Migration, to the big cities of the industrial North. Just recently, I found myself listening to B.B. King’s classic “Why I Sing the Blues” and had to stop what I was doing to truly register the opening verse:

When I first got the blues
They brought me over on a ship
Men were standing over me
And a lot more with a whip
And everybody wanna know
Why I sing the blues…

I thought back to when I drove briefly through Mississippi this March and was taken aback by its disingenuous welcome sign, “Birthplace of America’s Music,” which offers absolutely no hint whatsoever as to how that music came about. A much more simple and accurate statement would be to call it “Birthplace of the Blues,” and leave travelers and residents alike to draw their own reference points.

Unfortunately, such revisionism is everywhere in America, and probably the world. I’m currently reading the brand new book “Country Soul: Making Music and Making Race in the American South“ by Charles L. Hughes, which takes a fresh look at the famously “integrated” studios of Memphis, Muscle Shoals and Nashville, and the mostly white musicians who played on (and produced, and owned) so much of the great soul music that came out of them. The story of how black music from the South was steadily assimilated into and by white popular culture is, thanks to the work of people like Hughes, one of ongoing debate – and “Country Soul” confirms how our own skin color, however subconsciously and perhaps even unwillingly, plays into our individual perspectives on the issue(s).

Is anyone surprised by Salon writer Tony Fletcher using the death of Mr. King as an excuse to delve into slavery, a practice that has been outlawed in the United States for over 150 years, and racism? These folks cannot help themselves when it comes to stoking the flames, rather than looking for healing. Seriously, a sign set Tony off. A sign. Blues is America’s music. It was developed here. But, loony tunes liberals always have to assuage their white guilt and push this narrative. They can’t help themselves.

And, apparently, because White people like the Blues, we’re unconscious racists. Seriously, even after all this time, I really do not get in the slightest how Liberal brains work. The insane thoughts that emanate are really insane.

Read: The Death Of B.B. King Means We Should Totally Remember Our Original Sin Or Something »

If All You See…

…is a horrible carbon pollution created desert, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on feminist logic.

Read: If All You See… »

Bummer: Your Binge Watching Is Making The Planet Hotter

If you’re a Warmist, you should immediately stop using the Internet

Your Binge-Watching Is Making the Planet Warmer

YOU RECYCLE. YOU ride your bike to work. You bring your own bags to the grocery. You might think you’re a good environmentalist. But those cat videos, TED talks, and Netflix original series you watch to unwind might be slowly killing the planet.

That’s the word from Greenpeace’s latest Clicking Clean report, which evaluates the clean energy initiatives of many different internet companies.

While we’re used to thinking about our environmental impact in terms of how much trash we throw out, how much we drive, and how much electricity we use in our homes, the report highlights the ways that our internet usage has environmental effects that we never see.

It’s a small percentage of the overall “carbon pollution”, but every bit hurts, so, to save Gaia, please stop using the web, Warmists. Do your part.

Read: Bummer: Your Binge Watching Is Making The Planet Hotter »

Are The Seas Really Rising Faster Than Ever?

Or, could it really have more to do with adjusted data? Here’s Jo Nova at Climate Change Dispatch

The Scandal Of Sea Levels — Rising Trends, Acceleration — Largely Created By Adjustments

Headlines across Australia yesterday told us the dire news that a new study finds that “Sea level rising faster in past 20 years than in entire 20th century“. A new paper by Watson et al is driving the headlines, but underneath this Nature paper is a swamp of adjustments, an error larger than the signal, and the result disagrees with many other studies and almost all the raw measurements. Paper after paper kept showing that sea levels rates had slowed (e.g Chen showed deceleration from 2004, Cazenave said in the last decade sea-levels had slowed 30% (but argued post hoc adjustments could solve that). Beenstock used 1000 tide gauges and found no acceleration of sea levels over the last 50 years. A different researcher — Phil Watson, found that Australian sea levels rose faster before World War II then slowed down.)

Firstly, hundreds of tide gauges show sea level rising at about a third of the rate than satellites do. Worse, the original satellite raw data showed the same slow rise, until it was suddenly adjusted. The real scandal is that the rapidly rising trend was largely created by adjustments in the first place. These latest corrections just adjust down part of the rate which had been created by adjusting up. On top of all that, the long paleo-history of sea levels done by people like Nils-Axel Mörner show that the current rise is not unusual or unprecedented at all. Could it get more pointless? It can: the acceleration Watson et al found is so small it’s less than the errors. (See the graph below).

Why, exactly, is the satellite data “adjusted” in such a manner? The data is the data, yet, Warmist “scientists” will trot out all sorts of excuses as to why their adjustments are needed, though they never answer “why” the data ends up being so far above the reality of the raw data. One of their favorite excuses is “bias drifts“, which, surprise!, ends up vastly increasing the results to match the Cult of Climastrology talking points.

Furthermore, the sea rise, as I’ve mentioned multiple times, is not unprecedented nor unusual. Since the end of the big sea rise from the end of the last glacial age slowed, about 7000 years ago, the average sea rise is 6-8 inches per century. Averages occur by taking two or more numbers, adding them, then dividing by the number of numbers. So, 2+14=16, divide by 2 and you get 7 inches. One would expect low to even negative sea rise during the cool Holocene eras, which typically last much longer than the Holocene warm periods, hence, we should expect a sea rise of at least 16 inches per year during a warm period. The sea rise was just 7 inches during the 20th Century. That’s a kick in the talking points, don’t you think? Of course, Warmists will screech out that the massive sea rise “is coming!!!!!!!!”

The conclusion of the paper is that instead of the sea levels rising at 3.2mm/yr as per the official satellite data, the are rising at 2.3mm/yr + 0.043mm/yr2 of acceleration. Over a century that means the projected sea level rise is revised downwards from 320mm to 251mm. That means sea level rise on current trends has dropped off the bottom end of any UNIPCC projection for sea level rise (AR5 WG1 SPM) for the period 2081-2100, as against 1985-2005. The likely range is between 260 and 820mm under all scenarios. The projection (mid-point 400mm) range is based on succeeding in cutting global emissions to near zero before 2100.

251mm equals 9.881 inches. So, barely above the average for the Holocene, and below what one would expect during a typical Holocene warm period.

Ms. Nova goes on to describe how the satellite data diverges from the sea level gauge data, well worth the read. Nor is this the first time the disparity has been noted. Steven Goddard (yes, I know the Warmists will blame the messenger) showed, using actual data, that the sea level data shows just .7mm a year and falling during the 21st Century.

This is also not the first time it has been shown that the adjusted satellite data is way off. Another study showed that the data has been adjusted upwards 34%, including “many years after publication, often repeatedly on the same data, and in defiance of the laws of probability, always in an upward direction.”

If tide gauges were good enough to figure out the rate of acceleration from 1900 – 1992, why are they wrong as soon as the satellites start operating? Does anyone think we should compare highly adjustified satellite data to tide gauges if there are continuous tide gauge records over the same period? Its like a tree-ring spliced to a thermometer: Good PR, bad science.

It’s harder to adjust the tide gauges, making it harder to come out with unhinged and doomy prognostications.

Read: Are The Seas Really Rising Faster Than Ever? »

Was The Derailed Amtrak Train Hit By An Object?

Another potential nail in the disgusting Blamestorming from Democrats

(WRAL/AP) The Amtrak train that derailed along the nation’s busiest tracks may have been struck by an object in the moments before it crashed, investigators said Friday, raising new questions about the deadly accident.

National Transportation Safety Board member Robert Sumwalt said an assistant conductor aboard the train told investigators that she heard the Amtrak engineer talking over the radio with an engineer for a regional railroad just before the crash.

The regional engineer, who was in the same area as the Amtrak train, said his train had been hit by a rock or some other projectile. The conductor heard Brandon Bostian, who was at the Amtrak controls, say the same had happened to his train, according to Sumwalt.

The windshield of the Amtrak train was shattered in the accident but one area of glass had a breakage pattern that could be consistent with being hit by an object and the FBI is investigating, he said.

Sumwalt declined to speculate about the exact significance of a projectile, but the idea raised the possibility that the engineer might have been distracted, panicked or even wounded in the moments before the train left the rails at more than twice the speed limit along a sharp bend.

The above article briefly mentions that two other trains were hit with some sort of object. A CNN article describes this in a bit more detail, including a different train being hit by something that made a “loud boom”

https://twitter.com/TheAlfredPrice/status/598306700802793472

Obviously, this is still all speculation, but, it might explain why the train sped up. Though it was still traveling 20 miles an hour too fast for the curve, and even exceeding the speed by 5mph could derail a train.

SEPTA trains traveling through the area — including one of the poorest and most violent parts of Philadelphia — have had projectiles thrown at them in the past, whether by vandals or teenagers, she said. It was unusual that the SEPTA train was forced to stop on Tuesday night.

Interestingly, this is also an area that heavily votes Democrat. Weird, eh? If they were hitting the trains with some sort of object, which sounds more like rocks or something similar rather than bullets, Democrats can think about how their policies created this situation.

The wreck has focused new attention on positive train control, a system that automatically brakes trains going too fast. It is installed on the tracks where the train derailed, but it had not been turned on because further testing was needed, Amtrak President Joseph Boardman said.

Huh. So, the system is there, just not on yet. I love how Democrats jump to conclusions in order to use a tragedy for political purposes, and then their disgusting narrative immediately starts to fall apart.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Was The Derailed Amtrak Train Hit By An Object? »

If All You See…

…is a farm that you hope only uses horse power, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post gay and straight traffic lights.

Read: If All You See… »

Surprise: Climate Change Is Really About Progressive Politics

I know, you’re totally shocked that “climate change” really has little to do with science

6 ways to promote economic equality and climate action at the same time

At a rally in front of the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and fellow liberal Democrats such as Rep. Barbara Lee of California unveiled a national agenda for greater economic equality. The 13-point “Progressive Agenda,” which was heavily influenced by Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz’s new 100-page report for the Roosevelt Institute on policy solutions to income inequality, is a left-wing wish list meant to echo Newt Gingrich’s 1994 Contract with America.

“The Progressive Agenda” includes plenty of popular, and populist, ideas, from raising the minimum wage to mandating paid employee sick leave. The emphasis is on correcting a system that has been rigged for the benefit of corporations and the wealthy, particularly through the tax code, and replacing it with a fairer system that rewards labor rather than just wealth. The agenda would do a lot to help the U.S. catch up to the policies of other developed countries that have more equitable income and wealth distributions.

Notably absent, though, is practically anything to do with the fossil fuel economy, suburban sprawl, and the policies that prop them up, which are bad for both regular Americans and the climate. De Blasio’s agenda contains a token reference to environmental protection, along with labor rights, as something that shouldn’t be sacrificed to global trade deals. Stiglitz makes brief mention of a carbon tax. But many sources of inequality related to the dirty energy economy — and sources of opportunity that arise from a shift to a clean economy — go unmentioned.

Then we get as the money quote

To help progressive leaders develop such a plan, here’s a list of six policies that would help cut carbon pollution, clean up the air, strengthen our cities, and redistribute tax dollars from fossil fuel companies and rich individuals to the poor and middle class.

The ideas are exactly what you’d expect, long on fossil fuels hatred, a carbon tax, eliminating the home mortgage deduction (because you evil people buy homes in the suburbs, which is Bad for Hotcoldwetdry), and others, along with shifting all the money to people who haven’t earned it. If you really pay attention to what Cult of Climastrology members say and push, it’s easy to see that this whole movement has everything to do with Progressive politics and nary a thing to do with science.

Read: Surprise: Climate Change Is Really About Progressive Politics »

We Face A Mad Max World Unless We Tackle “Climate Change” Or Something

So says Charlize Theron. And, yes, she’s serious

(UK Guardian) The actor Charlize Theron, who takes a leading role in the new Mad Max movie as a one-armed warrior driving five sex slaves to safety, has expressed her fears that a bleak future awaits the planet unless global warming is addressed.

The film is set 45 years in the future, in a post-apocalyptic world desperately short of water and fuel and ruled by a barbaric dictator who enslaves men and imprisons women for breeding and breast-milk.

“It felt very grounded in real events,” said Theron at a press conference for the film, which opens worldwide this week, following its gala premiere at Cannes on Thursday. “The idea of globalisation and global warming and drought and the value of water, and leadership becoming completely out of hand.”

Say, I wonder how much energy and fossil fuels were used during the filming of the movie? How many plastic bottles of water were consumed and discarded? The use of hair dryers and ice makers, air conditioning and non-locally grown food? How did all the folks involved in the movie, including Ms. Theron, get Namibia, where a goodly chunk of the movie was filmed? How much energy and fossil fuels will be used to not only distribute the film for viewing, but be used to move viewers to the theaters? How much food will be wasted at the theaters? How did Ms. Theron travel to the premiere of the movie? Unfortunately, the Guardian failed to ask Ms. Theron (a fantastic actress) those questions.

Theron said that when she first watched a scene in the film depicting a terrifying thunder-and-sandstorm she wondered if it was a little far-fetched. “But there are images on Google right now of Sahara desert sand being blown, in that state, all through Africa. And that’s frightening. The hair lifted up on the back of my neck. What makes [the film] even scarier is that it is something that is not far off if we don’t pull it together.”

BTW, the original Mad Max was about the end result of a nuclear conflict.

My life fades. The vision dims. All that remains are memories. I remember a time of chaos… ruined dreams… this wasted land. But most of all, I remember The Road Warrior. The man we called “Max.” To understand who he was, you have to go back to another time… when the world was powered by the black fuel… and the desert sprouted great cities of pipe and steel. Gone now… swept away. For reasons long forgotten, two mighty warrior tribes went to war, and touched off a blaze which engulfed them all. Without fuel they were nothing.

Hence the reason no one was living in cities.

Read: We Face A Mad Max World Unless We Tackle “Climate Change” Or Something »

NY Times: Stop Illegal Alien Detention

Things that are Super Important In Liberal World

(NY Times) Of all the malfunctioning parts in the country’s broken-down immigration machinery, probably the most indefensible is the detention system.

This is the vast network of jails and prisons where suspected immigration violators are held while awaiting a hearing and possible deportation. Immigrant detainees are not criminal defendants or convicts serving sentences. They are locked up merely because the government wants to make sure they show up in immigration court.

That’s  a pretty good reason, since roughly 30-40% of illegals never appear, and the number of no-shows increased 153% over the past four years.

Detention is intended to help enforce the law, but, in practice, the system breeds cruelty and harm, and squanders taxpayer money. It denies its victims due process of law, punishing them far beyond the scale of any offense. It shatters families and traumatizes children. As a system of mass incarceration — particularly of women and children fleeing persecution in Central America — it is immoral.

Here’s a better idea: just deport them. Also, stop them from coming across the border in the first place. Oh, wait, many of these detainees are illegals caught crossing the border illegally. Because of idiot laws made by pro-illegal supporters law enforcement can’t simply drop them off across the border. Now the NY Times wants to release even more into the U.S. Who end up being a drain on taxpayer money. Then the NY Times and Democrats demand that they be made citizens. Weird how that works, eh?

A powerful case for ending immigration detention, along with an array of alternatives, is made in a new report from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Center for Migration Studies. It traces how the system has grown immense, from housing 85,000 detainees in 1995 to more than 440,000 in 2013. There are many reasons for this growth, including state and local immigration crackdowns, federal dragnet programs like Secure Communities and the flood of money from Congress to the private prison operators that have profited so fruitfully from immigrant criminalization. The system has gotten more sprawling and scandal-prone, but reforms don’t stick. The notorious Hutto family detention center in Texas, where children went to classes in prison scrubs, stopped housing families. But the surge of families at the border seeking refuge last year created a political crisis and led the department to resurrect family detention, with new centers with thousands of prison beds for mothers and children.

What all this actually shows is that our government, along with Useful Idiots like certain Social Justice Warrior groups and the NY Times, are doing all they can to entice illegals to come to the U.S. illegally, along with overstaying their visas. But, the Times has a plan!

Ending mass detention would not mean allowing unauthorized immigrants to disappear. Supervised or conditional release, ankle bracelets and other monitoring technologies, plus community-based support with intensive case management, can work together to make the system more humane. But neither Congress nor the Homeland Security Department has embraced these approaches, which would be far cheaper than locking people up.

If they aren’t criminals, why would they still be treated as such, Senor NY Times? Of course, none of these methods will stop the majority of the illegals from disappearing into the nation. Which is exactly what the NY Times and Democrats want. Then, they push for legalization. Notice that nowhere does the Times recommend quick deportation immediately after caught.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times: Stop Illegal Alien Detention »

Pirate's Cove