Democratic leaders criticized President Bush after his New Orleans speech last week for trying to use the disaster to promote “ideological experimentation.” And I was a little surprised myself that he chose that speech to outline plans for school vouchers, “worker recovery accounts,” and opportunity zones. But David Brooks opined in his New York Times column on Sunday that the reconstruction could be Bush’s version of FDR’s New Deal, and an opportunity to forge “a positive use of government that is neither big government liberalism nor antigovernment libertarianism.” That will be a battle, Brooks noted, but said that if Bush can “devote himself to executing his policies, the Gulf Coast will be his T.V.A., the program that serves as a model for what can be done nationwide.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
41 Comments
The TVA is a model program for what can be done nationwide?
I think what you will find is that the Bush Administration will push the “ownership” society. For which the poor can finally obtain ownership of their homes. The “Project” concept did not work under the Great Society of liberalism. Sticking the poor into a high rise is not the right answer.
But if the poor get a chance to own their own homes, that might become a model for the nation to follow. :)
Hey Joe,Do you think all those slumlords that contributed to the republicans will allow a program that promotes home ownership?
What makes you think that slum lords contribute to Republicans. When the dominate party in poor district that have slums are Democrats. Do you think a slum lord would waste his money on a party that will not get into office? Nah! They would put there money for the winning team. You know? It’s been the Democrats motto to keep people poor.
Slumlords don’t care, they know that the people they rent to will never have it together enough to buy their own home. So what if you own a home? You still have to make the payments. People who need their rent subsidized by the government have no business expecting the government to help them make house payments, that would open a big can of worms and the American taxpayer is saddled with enough already. If we want to fix the problem, then we need to focus on why so many Americans can’t get their act together enough to keep themselves out of poverty in the first place.
Damoon! I know this is a serious subject, but many American think that poverty in America exist, because of Bush’s tax cuts to the rich.
Joe, Damoon,There have been a number of experimental programs where people rented apartments and houses with the rent applied to purchase, and full ownership after a period of residence. Most of these have been wildly successful. You give people a little hope and a positive motivation, and you’ll be amazed at how well they do.Landlords (like Builders Inc. here) make money by keeping people hopeless and unmotivated except to pay rent, and not complain about substandard conditions and getting ripped off.They contribute to Bush, for lack of anyone much further right in power, and they certainly wouldn’t want their customer base to aspire to home ownership.
Slum lords don’t live in their own slums. I know of a few landlords that own some of the crappiest properties around WSU and live in the nicer area’s of Wichita. Whether they are dems or republicans…who cares.
Joe, even the not-so-bright people know that poverty has been around forever. The poverty lines are deepening even more because of our Good Ol’ Boy president.
That speech scared me a little. That man f**k’s up everything he does. This won’t be good.
Yup, George could screw it up. He is too far left to crack down on the socialist leadership down there. If he just throws a couple of hundred Billion at it and allows the local corrupt leaders to control it – - – well a ghetto with new paint is all we will have.$200 Billion should keep over 20,000 folks gainfully employed for a couple of years. Previously unskilled, unemployed locals can do at least half the work. OJT can do wonders for their future. Sweat equity works too. If they won’t come back to NO to work let them stay where they are, forever. Let NO send the welfare checks to Texas. No slum lords allowed.
Jed, I have no issue with those who “rent to own”, I just have a major problem with the government subsidizing anything like that. I know of no landlords/slumlords (and I know some slumlords, believe me!) that make any effort to keep people hopeless and unmotivated. I’ve been a landlord for 18 yrs (I’ve had 150 tenants at once), and I know for a fact that no one (not even a slumlord) wants renters that are unmotivated, because it’s nothing but trouble. When people quit blaming everybody but themselves for their poor choices, then and only then will we reduce the number of people living in poverty in our country. The first step to success is self responsibility.
Comparing bush to Franklin Delano Roosevelt is an insult to FDR on the level of comparing a snake oil salesman to Mother Theresa.
FDR’s policies not only saved this nation, they elevated it. For sixty years at least, we were something more than the quasi-feudal society that the oh so revered (but sadly and intentionally flawed) founding fathers set us up to be and corporate greed only fueled.
Of course, bush has already managed to dismantle much of that. This new post Katrina “plan” of his is nothing more than his handlers attempt at a final assualt.
I give the bushies this, they are as ever good at doublespeak.
“Opportunity zone” an area where all environmental, employment, civil rights, and other regulations are suspended. “We gotta rebuild! We can’t be troubled by calls to the no bid contractors we appoint with foot dragging red tape questions about paying workers a fair wage!”
Urban homestead act….. This one is REALLY fun. These tracts of federally held land (read housing projects and park lands) are to offered in a lottery…..anybody think that lotery is gonna be fair?….to those willing to build on the land.Hmmm we are already seeing land developers contacting those who are of……somewhat lesser means…with offers to buy out their property. Hey the recent eminent domain ruling of the bush court ougtta only aid them in this! Gotta get the most value outta that land!
bush and his crowd want to turn the hurricane ravaged gulf coast into a great demonstration of the conservative ideal. They don’t need to do that. You only have to look aroud you anywhere in America to see the already tragic results of their ministrations.
Damoon,I’ve known slumlords who raise rents at any opportunity, evict people for complaining about rotted floors, leaky roofs and broken pipes, fail to pay for required services such as trash collection, refuse to return security deposits under any circumstances, won’t make even the most basic repairs and threaten anyone who calls Central Inspection. That’s pretty opressive in my book. Yeah, those people made some bad choices- they rented from assholes! Unfortunately, the assholes are often the only ones with vacancies. The decent landlords are usually full up!
Damoon,Also, these landlords often collect government subsidies, use their political influence to get tax breaks, etc. I’d lot rather subsidize a rent to own program than throw more money to those bastards!
Home ownership is at an all time high in America today. Home ownership by minorities is at an all time high in America.
Most experts seem to attribute that to very low mortgage interest rates, and I would say that overall low inflation helps as well.
If “tax cuts for the rich” are hurting the poor, then who are all the people buying these homes. Are they rich people who used to be poor?
If the Bush economy has been so horrible how is it that these homeowner stats look so good.
A President cannot make people succesfull but he can help create the conditions that make success easier. I guess this must be Bill Clintons doing since Bush couldnt possibly be at fault for this kind of good news.
Republicans blamed Clinton for a recession during Bush’s reign….Clinton might as well get credit for the recovery.
Huh?
Snidely
The recession BEGAN during the Clinton admin. The DOT COM bubble burst DURING the Clinton administration. Who else would you blame it on.
Excuse me Heckler, but the stock market didn’t start dropping till March, AFTER Bush was in office.
Snidley
Excuse me, but I remember losing a good size chunk of my 401k in mid-1999 when the tech bubble busted. There was a large drop in the market after Bush took office. Can you explain to me what policy of Bushes, seeing how he’d been in office less then 3 months, led to that stock market drop?
Yup, no question, Home ownership is up. A few people own alot of homes. Of course they don’t live in those homes!
Yes the bush economy has indeed been good; for property speculators and landlords.
Bush just has that effect. Look at his record. Everything he’s touched turned to shit. If you lost money in 1999, you were in the wrong market. I work in tech; started for the company in 99. They handed out money like candy….till shortly after Bush took office. You republicans keep saying it’s Clinton’s fault, but that doesn’t make it a fact. The fact is, the market went south after Bush took office.
So far Bush has burned up a budget surplus, presided over the worst attack on Americans ever, given us a recession, record deficits, 2 wars, and the biggest roll-back of civil liberties in this country’s history. And before it’s all said and done, he’ll be responsible for getting us the first military defeat since Vietnam.
I know….at least Bush didn’t get a blow job.
Jed, landlords that collect government substidies have strict code enforcement, and you can’t evict someone for complaining about repairs that need to be made,and you can’t just raise someone’s rent during their lease simply because you want to. If a landlord does any of that, he/she could be subject to litigation. I don’t know where you live, but in Wichita, properties that belong to good landlords are by no means full. The people who live in cheap, substandard housing are the ones who have no money or credit to rent a decent place. I can also tell you horror stories about how my rentals have been trashed by tenants, but that’s another story. Everytime I have a vacancy, you wouldn’t believe the trouble I have finding good tenants, many people who apply have lousy credit because they don’t know how to handle money, or they’ve got a criminal background, or they don’t have a job, or they’ve been evicted a number of times for all sorts of reasons. I wish that things were as rosey for landlords as you think they are, but that’s just not the reality.Everytime I give someone who’s been evicted or has bad credit a break, I get screwed, so I just don’t do it anymore. I’m in business to make money so I can support myself, not to house people who otherwise would be homeless. People are not poor and forced to live substandard housing because of the slumlords, and a person’s poverty is only a symptom of the problem. Throwing money and opportunity to poor people may make those of us who have more feel better, but it won’t do anything to bring people out of poverty who are living that way because of the poor life choices they have made and often continue to make.Another thing, why the hell would I donate to any politican? There is no politican or political party that has ever passed any legislation to make my life as a landlord easier. Pleae give me an example of if you know of one!
Ah Damoon, my sympathy! I’m not on your scale, but I have 3 rentals in another town (I used to have 5). I’ll bet we could swap nightmare stories about renters. The law is definitely slanted against landlords. You made a very good point. Never, but never do anybody a favor. You’ll get it broke off every time.
What’s your worst story, XXX? One time I had a tenant call me at midnight to tell me the two ladies next door had been drinking, got into a fight, then one drove their truck through his sliding glass doors into his living room trying to get out of the parking lot!One time I had one tenant shoot at the tenant that lived below him, then was incredulous because I evicted him for it!After years of the craziness mostly caused by people’s stupidity, I finally downsized. Now I only have 4 rentals and I’m really picky about who I rent to.
Ok, I had a unit ready to rent and was taking apps. One was a woman who had a child. She was unemployed, on welfare, bad/no credit. I showed the rental in the afternoon. That night, she jimmied the window and moved in. It took almost 8 months to get her out. I had her charged with breaking and entering. She was convicted, but got a slap on the wrist. She charged me with harassment and stalking. It cost a fortune to beat that. It was unbelievable! The courts treated me like I was the bad guy because I was trying to get this poor woman and her child out of my house. I had a court appointed lawer (hers) accuse me of being a racist. I got nasty letters from the local chapter of NAACP.
I didn’t see a dime of rent and I spent several thousand dollars in legal fees. The house was trashed when I finally got her out.
You will forgive me if I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who make their living off of people only looking for a roof over their head. Isn’t it always you folks who oppose public housing because it cuts into your business?
“Isn’t it always you folks who oppose public housing because it cuts into your business?”
Nope. JR, my rentals aren’t in Wichita. There’s some subsidized housing where they’re at, but not much.You don’t have much sympathy for people who make their living off of people only looking for a roof over their head? My God, JR….I can only imagine how you feel about grociers.
JR, being poor doesn’t give you the right to steal. It also doesn’t give you the right to destroy other people’s property. I suppose your comment would be a little easier to take if I made anything off my rentals. I don’t have the ritzy expensive properties. What I have was bought from HUD. Then I go in and rebuild them. JR, that doesn’t mean I call a contractor. It means me and my truck and my tools go in and replace the plumbing, re-sheetrock the walls, put in new heating and air conditioning, new bathrooms, and new appliances. What I get for rent pays for taxes and insurance and upkeep. What’s left goes to support my retired parents. They supported me when I was a child; I owe it to them to help out now that they’re old.
But go ahead and cast me as the bad guy JR. Obviously I’m the scum of the earth for providing low cost housing and trying to give my folks a deicent life.
JR–
Let’s not turn on each other when they’re so many riper targets that need plucking.
XXX is using hard-work and ingenuity to provide a much needed service to society. That’s nothing but laudable.
People, poor or not, don’t have the right to steal his services any more than they have the right to come into your bedroom and sleep in your bed.
That the legal system and the NAACP would harass somebody who’s just trying to make an honest living is an outrage–and makes you see why the right-wing backlash has gained so much traction.
I suspect this woman had a number of legal avenues for housing she could have pursued. She obviously knew her way around the legal system, and how to manipulate it.
You can’t expect XXX to provide free housing anymore than one would expect you to loan out your spare bedroom to winos.
So true, Galahad! And there is no competion between landlords and government subsidized housing, I have no idea where that myth came from.My hats off to you, XXX. You’re what living in America should represent, personal intitive and hard work that results in success and self sufficency. One piece of advice, learn how to do your own evictions and you’ll save a ton of money. I can get someone out in 30 days (usually less)and it costs me about $20. I was lucky in that I had a mentor when I had an apartment complex who really taught me how to manage rental properties.
Damoon, I confess I never heard such a thing. When I have someone evicted, it usually requires physical removal.
By the way Galahad, thanks for the support. I was feeling a little down after JR’s post. I always considered myself one of the “regular people”. I think JR may be the first person that ever put me in the “bad guy” group.
XXX, if you know how to do the paperwork and file it, you can do your own evictions. I’ve never had to have anyone physically removed from one of my properties, but if need be, the sheriff would do it in about 30 days after I file. It’s really not that hard to do. Lawyers are in business to make as much money as possible, that’s why they drag things out so much. I only had one time when I had to hire a lawyer, and that was because the tenant filed for bankruptcy after I submitted the paperwork for her removal.Don’t let JR get you down, his punishment will be that he’ll get to be a landlord in his next life, then I bet he’ll be more empathetic!!By the way Jr, my tenants love me because I’m fair and treat them with respect as long as they keep up their end of the deal. But, if someone tries to screw me over, watch out!!
I guess I need to check into that. As I’ve gotten more careful about who I rent to, evictions have dropped off. Now It’s more likely to be people dissapearing owing me a couple months rent. Soon as my folks are gone, I’m out of the rental business.
Don’t give up! Having real estate is a great investment, and certainly safer than the stock market!
Not much chance I’ll get out in my lifetime. Thankfully my folks are in waaay better shape than average. They’ll probably outlive me, LOL.
I didn’t mean to offend. I don’t think I called anyone a bad guy. I just said I had a little trouble finding sympathy for landlords. I cited the difference between someone who has a home and rents it at profit to someone who needs a home. While tenants do have extensive rights, defenses, and recourse, it is still haves vs. have nots. I think you will agree also that there are far too few people and banking interests that own a whole lot of “homes” ………that is how bush gets his blatantly false statistics on “home ownership”.
I do know of fair folks who develop and rent or sell property with an eye toward doing good. I would like to do so myself. As I cannot possibly be alone (but likley lonely) in this, my comments before were predjudiced.
Mea Culpa XXX
Thanks JR.
This sound mean, but often what I find is that the difference between the “haves” and the “have nots”, is that the “haves” are willing to work their butts off to get ahead. I came from a working class family that didn’t have a pot to pee in and in young adulthood often I didn’t know where our next meal was coming from. I had 3 kids by the age of 24 and didn’t go back to school until I was 30. I worked 3 jobs to put my kids through college, working as a nurse and buying dumpy houses, fixing them up and selling them. I took advantage of the opportunity to invest in rental properties and learned as much about managing them as I possibly could. That’s why I have a real problem with people that feels it’s the government’s responsibility to “lift” them up so they can have what others have. Unless a person has severe physical or cognitive disabilities, there is no reason they can’t make it if they’re willing to work hard. There is so much opportunity in this country, you just have to stop whining, get off your a**, and get to work.
Well Damoon as a single Dad out of work these last 18 months I sure aint seeing your land of milk and honey. Don’t pull the line about hard work.I worked my ass off even to the point of making myself deathly ill for the last 14 years. The Family Medical Leave act kept me going the last five of those years, that and my union.
Maybe it has been easier for you Damoon. It tends to be easier for females. Oh yeah….GOVERNMENT did that.
Save your sanctimonious “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” crap for the flag waving crowd. Meanwhile read your constitution, you know that part in the preamble about promoting the general welfare?
I’m not trying to be “sanctimonius”, I just know that hard work helped me develop the discipline and skills I needed to make it in this world. The one thing I avoided was putting my future in the hands of a corporaton or institution, because when times get hard they throw you away like yesterday’s trash. It’s the same as getting married and hoping that a man will take care of me for the rest of my life. I could never stand to be that vulnerable, so financial independance has always been very important to me.I’m sorry your life and work experience has not been what you’d hoped it would be, but I think the more people depend on the government, the less they depend on themselves. Johnson’s “Great Society” has just given us a huge underclass of dependant people with no self esteem. I’m not sure that I interpet “promoting general welfare” the same way you do.
Serious JR, it might be time to consider leaving Wichita. Sometimes you have to go where the opportunity is. That’s how I ended up in Wichita. Also, having a history as a union activist can hurt your chances for employment. I got black balled for a couple of years because of that. I don’t regret it, but it made life tough for a while.
Being self employed is the best, that way you’re not at the mercy of the whims of management. Nursing has been good to me, but I’d rather die than work in a hospital again. I like home health because it’s very flexible and for the most part I’m on my own.