LaxPower Back-Up Stick

jhu72 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:26 pm What's wrong with Wyoming?

jhu72 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:26 pm What's wrong with Wyoming?

a fan wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:48 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:26 pm What's wrong with Wyoming?

From your citation.

Loucks, 52, said he and many other Wyoming residents support both an audit of the federal government and a balanced budget amendment that would limit government spending to what it can actually afford, instead of adding to the ballooning national deficit.

Please! Pretty please, with sugar on top! Let's do this.

Anyone here want to tell Mr. Loucks here how much of Wyoming's budgets comes from the Federal Budget. But he wants to cut off that money.

(pssst. Wyoming gets 38% of its budget from Federal coffers. Don't tell anyone)

Works for me. Who do I vote for to flush Wyoming down the toilet for good? The only ones left will be the coastal elite libs who vacation in Jackson Hole. But if that's what this guy wants? Great. Let's pull the ol' trigger, and then Mr. Loucks can act surprised when Wyomings economy collapses, and people flee to urban cities where the actual jobs are.

Lower taxes for me, though, and apparently that's all that's important in America anymore.

ToastDunk wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:06 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:18 pm Try reading what I wrote, PB. I was asking what you'd done to help the residents of any non-white majority city or town. Not money (though that'd be one way to "help") but time. I asked "How many families' homes has he visited, classrooms, clinics in those areas he describes?"

My guess from your response is... nada.

Which means you have zero first hand insight to the folks who are struggling to make their communities better, to help their families be safe and successful, to resist the scourge of the drug trade.

I addressed the "why" directly.

Who drives the crony-capitalist corruption in the cities (this is true of Dem or GOP run cities)? It's the wealthy, white, suburban real estate players. They control the levers. They don't care in the slightest whether it's a Dem or R in the Mayor's office, they just want their tax breaks, the neighborhood of their real estate investments policed, they want any issues to be ghettoized. They only care about those issues when they spill over into their properties.

That's the painful reality. (not true of every single real estate developer, but that's where the crony-capitalism pulls the strings).

Now, I'm a huge critic of the multiple serial failures of political leadership of my city, Baltimore. It's downright disgusting.

But I don't ascribe it to "socialism".
That's the right wing media approach to try to divide us by race and demography.
No interest in actual solutions.
And it's code for race.
Ugly and stupid, but effective for sharpening viewer outrage.

Or these real estate developers "fix" the problem by taking over.

New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward targeted for gentrification: 'It's going to feel like it belongs to the rich'
Basic services remain hard to find in the hardest-hit neighborhood during Hurricane Katrina but white millennials are driving up real estate prices. The latest development: a condo complex on the site of a bulldozed school
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... rification

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:49 pm

ToastDunk wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:06 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:18 pm Try reading what I wrote, PB. I was asking what you'd done to help the residents of any non-white majority city or town. Not money (though that'd be one way to "help") but time. I asked "How many families' homes has he visited, classrooms, clinics in those areas he describes?"

My guess from your response is... nada.

Which means you have zero first hand insight to the folks who are struggling to make their communities better, to help their families be safe and successful, to resist the scourge of the drug trade.

I addressed the "why" directly.

Who drives the crony-capitalist corruption in the cities (this is true of Dem or GOP run cities)? It's the wealthy, white, suburban real estate players. They control the levers. They don't care in the slightest whether it's a Dem or R in the Mayor's office, they just want their tax breaks, the neighborhood of their real estate investments policed, they want any issues to be ghettoized. They only care about those issues when they spill over into their properties.

That's the painful reality. (not true of every single real estate developer, but that's where the crony-capitalism pulls the strings).

Now, I'm a huge critic of the multiple serial failures of political leadership of my city, Baltimore. It's downright disgusting.

But I don't ascribe it to "socialism".
That's the right wing media approach to try to divide us by race and demography.
No interest in actual solutions.
And it's code for race.
Ugly and stupid, but effective for sharpening viewer outrage.

Or these real estate developers "fix" the problem by taking over.

New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward targeted for gentrification: 'It's going to feel like it belongs to the rich'
Basic services remain hard to find in the hardest-hit neighborhood during Hurricane Katrina but white millennials are driving up real estate prices. The latest development: a condo complex on the site of a bulldozed school
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... rification

I'll take somewhat of the 'counter' on this one, as I think some folks may misunderstand "gentrification" and potential "displacement" effects as synonymous.

I did my senior honors thesis way back in 1980 on this topic. I was a Government major with additional Urban Studies and Public Policy certificates. My thesis took the, at the time, unpopular position in the academic world that market forces we label "gentrification" were a very necessary and efficient part of urban renewal and revitalization, badly needed in the wake of 'white flight' in the '60's and early '70's. My professors in the Urban Studies dept were a bit horrified by my pro-capitalism approach to the question. At the time, remedies like rent control were in vogue (a disastrous program of good intentions gone awry).

I had worked during an off term in the Dollar House Program in Baltimore, Mayor Schaefer administration, and seen first hand the revitalization of neighborhoods, and resultant increased tax base, through that program. Black families, white families, whatever, were given the opportunity to take on abandoned homes with a commitment to invest their sweat and dollars and then live in the homes no less than 5 years. Otterbein, Federal Hill, Canton...all sparked by that program.

I argued that cities need a constant turnover of people and capital in order to maintain their vitality and tax base. Healthy neighborhoods are in a constant state of flux and turnover in which their population does not decrease nor lessen in economic means. However, various traumas can disrupt neighborhoods and near entire cities, whether the loss of the largest employers or race riots or other factors, and a neighborhood or city as a collection of such can 'tip' into decline. The loss of tax base leads to degradation of services like school, health, police, etc. Further flight.

Conversely, public policies can encourage the trends in the reverse direction, leading to a tipping point at which market forces take over.

Which is not to say that this process of turnover does not cause potential disruption and 'displacement'. Sound public policy addresses these effects proactively, but not with policies that prevent the positive market forces. Ensuring access to more affordable housing, subsidized as necessary for those with less means or the elderly are essential to creating a positive momentum in which the positive effects of revitalization and increased tax base are enjoyed only by the 'gentrifiers'. Social services, employment training, school improvement, policing can all be designed to respect and benefit the least economically capable, and affordable by virtue of the increased tax base.

This is entirely possible to do when the public policy emphasis is on neighborhoods, not tax breaks for major commercial development projects. The latter tend to have grossly disproportionate power in most Mayor's offices (and campaign coffers) versus the dispersion of neighborhood investments. This has nothing to with party or conservative versus liberal social views.

Lots more to say on the topic.

On New Orleans, I don't know enough about the facts to speak authoritatively about their policies and/or lack of policies, but the encouragement of gentrification is not a per se mistake...however, there's apparently a potentially valid critique of how well they've addressed rebuilding of social infrastructure like schools, etc. Racial dynamics can easily get mixed up in this sort of thing.

ToastDunk wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:06 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:49 pm

ToastDunk wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:06 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:18 pm Try reading what I wrote, PB. I was asking what you'd done to help the residents of any non-white majority city or town. Not money (though that'd be one way to "help") but time. I asked "How many families' homes has he visited, classrooms, clinics in those areas he describes?"

My guess from your response is... nada.

Which means you have zero first hand insight to the folks who are struggling to make their communities better, to help their families be safe and successful, to resist the scourge of the drug trade.

I addressed the "why" directly.

Who drives the crony-capitalist corruption in the cities (this is true of Dem or GOP run cities)? It's the wealthy, white, suburban real estate players. They control the levers. They don't care in the slightest whether it's a Dem or R in the Mayor's office, they just want their tax breaks, the neighborhood of their real estate investments policed, they want any issues to be ghettoized. They only care about those issues when they spill over into their properties.

That's the painful reality. (not true of every single real estate developer, but that's where the crony-capitalism pulls the strings).

Now, I'm a huge critic of the multiple serial failures of political leadership of my city, Baltimore. It's downright disgusting.

But I don't ascribe it to "socialism".
That's the right wing media approach to try to divide us by race and demography.
No interest in actual solutions.
And it's code for race.
Ugly and stupid, but effective for sharpening viewer outrage.

Or these real estate developers "fix" the problem by taking over.

New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward targeted for gentrification: 'It's going to feel like it belongs to the rich'
Basic services remain hard to find in the hardest-hit neighborhood during Hurricane Katrina but white millennials are driving up real estate prices. The latest development: a condo complex on the site of a bulldozed school
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... rification

I'll take somewhat of the 'counter' on this one, as I think some folks may misunderstand "gentrification" and potential "displacement" effects as synonymous.

I did my senior honors thesis way back in 1980 on this topic. I was a Government major with additional Urban Studies and Public Policy certificates. My thesis took the, at the time, unpopular position in the academic world that market forces we label "gentrification" were a very necessary and efficient part of urban renewal and revitalization, badly needed in the wake of 'white flight' in the '60's and early '70's. My professors in the Urban Studies dept were a bit horrified by my pro-capitalism approach to the question. At the time, remedies like rent control were in vogue (a disastrous program of good intentions gone awry).

I had worked during an off term in the Dollar House Program in Baltimore, Mayor Schaefer administration, and seen first hand the revitalization of neighborhoods, and resultant increased tax base, through that program. Black families, white families, whatever, were given the opportunity to take on abandoned homes with a commitment to invest their sweat and dollars and then live in the homes no less than 5 years. Otterbein, Federal Hill, Canton...all sparked by that program.

I argued that cities need a constant turnover of people and capital in order to maintain their vitality and tax base. Healthy neighborhoods are in a constant state of flux and turnover in which their population does not decrease nor lessen in economic means. However, various traumas can disrupt neighborhoods and near entire cities, whether the loss of the largest employers or race riots or other factors, and a neighborhood or city as a collection of such can 'tip' into decline. The loss of tax base leads to degradation of services like school, health, police, etc. Further flight.

Conversely, public policies can encourage the trends in the reverse direction, leading to a tipping point at which market forces take over.

Which is not to say that this process of turnover does not cause potential disruption and 'displacement'. Sound public policy addresses these effects proactively, but not with policies that prevent the positive market forces. Ensuring access to more affordable housing, subsidized as necessary for those with less means or the elderly are essential to creating a positive momentum in which the positive effects of revitalization and increased tax base are enjoyed only by the 'gentrifiers'. Social services, employment training, school improvement, policing can all be designed to respect and benefit the least economically capable, and affordable by virtue of the increased tax base.

This is entirely possible to do when the public policy emphasis is on neighborhoods, not tax breaks for major commercial development projects. The latter tend to have grossly disproportionate power in most Mayor's offices (and campaign coffers) versus the dispersion of neighborhood investments. This has nothing to with party or conservative versus liberal social views.

Lots more to say on the topic.

On New Orleans, I don't know enough about the facts to speak authoritatively about their policies and/or lack of policies, but the encouragement of gentrification is not a per se mistake...however, there's apparently a potentially valid critique of how well they've addressed rebuilding of social infrastructure like schools, etc. Racial dynamics can easily get mixed up in this sort of thing.

Thanks for sharing your perspective MDlax, this complicated and I for one am very interested in learning more about the right way to go about revitalizing/rebuilding neighborhoods.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:18 pm


I was asking what you'd done to help the residents of any non-white majority city or town. Not money (though that'd be one way to "help") but time. I asked "How many families' homes has he visited, classrooms, clinics...

My guess from your response is... nada.

Which means you have zero....

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:25 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:18 pm


I was asking what you'd done to help the residents of any non-white majority city or town. Not money (though that'd be one way to "help") but time. I asked "How many families' homes has he visited, classrooms, clinics...

My guess from your response is... nada.

Which means you have zero....

(Typing on iPhone and skiing isn’t easy, but this post deserved a response)


Par for the Fanlax ‘Politics’ course, a neverTrumper/Democrat GUESSes the answer about another person’s character (‘my guess is...’), assumes the echo chamber mob will scratch his back with his ‘guess’, so he proceeds to launch into how the guesser is a Shi!head as a result of the guess (‘you have zero idea...’).

Thoughtful dialogue. I can’t understand where people get the notion that neverTrump and Dems aren’t on the level.

Where do we sign up?

a fan wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:07 pm I don't know if you noticed in the article, JHU72....but the bulk of the coal mining is happening on Federal land. - of course it is.

What a joy it would be if I could personally set the prices for those Federal mining leases, or to simply sell that land outright to the highest bidder.

It's Bundy ranch all over again. They think they DESERVE that land that's owned by all the people of the United States, and the shock on their faces if they had to pay market rates for that land would be a wonder to behold.

a fan wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:29 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 7:22 pm Show me how good federal socialism is doing keeping those urban youth fed, educated and employed in Baltimore etc.

Why Baltimore? Why not cite rural cities that have far more dependency on socialism and welfare?

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 7:22 pm Let me know if you have an issue with the urban brainwashing that keeps so many there dependent upon socialism and their representatives.

Who are you referring to here? Pete Brown and his socialist degree from a Government State University that's, as you put it, dependent on socialism and his representative in Congress?

Or are you referring to University of Maryland Grads who took my tax dollars to subsidize the education that puts food on their table every day?

Please clarify.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:34 am I’m referring to urban residents who are highly dependent upon the city to actually feed, educate and employ them.

Are you’re saying Baltimoreand it’s residents don’t use enough socialism and welfare?

What “rural city” should we use as an example that uses more?

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:02 pm
Most of them?

Rural residents are more dependent on Food Stamps than urban residents to feed them.

Rural residents are poorer than urban residents. Do you think they're going to fancy private schools, or are they depending on the county to educate them at public schools.

Rural residents are less employed than urban residents, making them more dependent on things like government work programs, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, etc.

Rural residents have higher rates of disability, making them more dependent on Government disability payments.

I have enjoyed living in a small town of 10,000, and in some of the biggest cities in the country. There's great parts to both, but people shouldn't throw stones in glass houses.

I guess the problem is that most people don't know they're living in glass houses when they complain.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:20 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:02 pm
Most of them?

Rural residents are more dependent on Food Stamps than urban residents to feed them.

Rural residents are poorer than urban residents. Do you think they're going to fancy private schools, or are they depending on the county to educate them at public schools.

Rural residents are less employed than urban residents, making them more dependent on things like government work programs, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, etc.

Rural residents have higher rates of disability, making them more dependent on Government disability payments.

I have enjoyed living in a small town of 10,000, and in some of the biggest cities in the country. There's great parts to both, but people shouldn't throw stones in glass houses.

I guess the problem is that most people don't know they're living in glass houses when they complain.

I anxiously await reliable stats and numbers to back those claims up.

Not averages, numbers.

I mentioned a specific city- Baltimore. You mentioned general "most of them"

Just for giggles, which rural city are you thinking of?!

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:34 am I’m referring to urban residents who are highly dependent upon the city to actually feed, educate and employ them.

Are you’re saying Baltimoreand it’s residents don’t use enough socialism and welfare?

What “rural city” should we use as an example that uses more?

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:20 pm I anxiously await your reliable stats and numbers to back those claims up.

Not averages, numbers.

I mentioned a specific city- Baltimore. You mentioned general "most of them"

Just for giggles, which rural city are you thinking of?!

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:39 pm I was wrong about the poverty rate, urban poverty is above rural from a newer source I found at census.gov - but rural residents earn less

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:03 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:20 pm I anxiously await your reliable stats and numbers to back those claims up.

Not averages, numbers.

I mentioned a specific city- Baltimore. You mentioned general "most of them"

Just for giggles, which rural city are you thinking of?!

I'm assuming that you ONLY mean SNAP money, right? All the others programs that flow to rural America "doesn't count", because the handouts are specific to rural areas, have a different program name, right?

Okay. Let's just look at SNAP. Notice that the top SNAP recipient areas are rural counties. Baltimore is #83 on the list

You want to cut 'em all off? Where do I sign?



https://www.dailyyonder.com/top-100-cou ... 018/05/07/

Bart wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:20 pm Thank for this. In your estimation is it percentage per capita or total number? If my math is correct on the top 100 counties list you provided I get the following: (my math may be a bit off)
Total Number of Metro on SNAP: 1066168 or 64.16% of total in top 100
Total Number of Rural on SNAP: 595523 or 35.83% of total in top 100

Is it more telling the total percentage of a counties people are on SNAP or the total number? I do not know.