Obama Orders Cities And Towns To Racially Integrate

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I disagree. White people living in the suburbs does not make black people kill each other in the projects.

Segregation isn't a bad thing but it cant be forced or engineered. It has to happen naturally. You cant take people with nothing and just drop them in a neighborhood with people who have achieved a degree of success and expect things to go smoothly.

As far as crime is concerned, where I live there are two major highways that connect our area of the suburbs to areas of severe urban plight less than 30 minutes away in either direction. What we have experienced is horrific crimes being committed, murder/robbery, by people who come in from a project and are back on the highway heading home within minutes of committing the crime. It is the biggest local threat to safety here and is indeed why many people in our community decided to carry guns.

One of the problems with forced segregation is that we all know where the majority of the criminals are from. Its not white people from the suburbs going downtown to shoot the place up. Hell, if a white person went into one of these neighborhoods at all there would be a bullseye on him the entire time. We know that gangbangers, criminals and murderers live in the projects. We don't know which people are the criminals and which are just trying to make a life for themselves. The problem is, the people doing the relocating don't know either. So every family that moves in is eyed very skeptically and watched very closely. Its not racist, its self preservation. Of course, they see it as racism. And we can add more tension to the mix now.

These are a people who are used to having things handed to them. They, thanks in large part to Obama, believe they are entitled to these gifts that should never stop coming. When someone says "You could improve your situation with a good job and hard work" they are met with the same tired old cliché. "There are no jobs in my neighborhood."

To that all I can say is, "Have you ever heard of rush hour traffic? Do you know what it is? Rush hour traffic is millions and millions of people who do not have jobs in their neighborhood. The difference between them and you - they have enough self respect to get out of bed early in the morning, and drag their tired butts to where the jobs are."

originally posted by: AbstractDreamz
I posted something about the Pruitt-Igoe projects in St. Louis and I think it applies here as well. When mass quantities of people start entering a new neighborhood or drastic changes are implemented, in the case of the above, blacks into St. Louis, they tend to spread the current residents out and away from the influx almost like cockroaches running from the light. Cockroaches in this case being the people who are working and supporting that particular community. This doesn't create more diversity, it actually spreads it out and moves the people who pay for the community far away from it. In turn, the jobs tend to follow those who leave and leave the new diverse area in a ghetto state. This brand of desegregation has been proven time and time again that it doesn't and won't work. It needs to be a slow process that happens over time, not something that can be ramped up and shock a community.

My goodness.....someone who actually gets it. Amazing. I never thought I'd read this anywhere. I've known this for 30 years, but......no one else ever seemed to get it. Kudos to you.

What you're referring to is that "organic" change, over a long period of time.....works to achieve the desired goal without the disruption shock tactics cause. But of course, the "controllers", the policy makers love the "shock" tactic because it works to be a "taking" without compensation; it destroys the wealth base of those they hate the most. And, it may work to achieve another one of their cherished dreams, that is to ultimately force the disarmament of those they hate the most. That happens because the natural response to their shock tactics is:
money.cnn.com...

a reply to: Vroomfondel

So, currently the "well off" live in the suburbs and the "less fortunate" live in the inner city. In a way, the haves are surrounding the have nots, keeping them contained....

Sending the "less fortunate" into the suburbs will cause the "well off" to move away, perhaps into the cities causing a "gentrification" of the inner city. This would cause more of the "well offs" to move in which would increase rents making more of the "less fortunates" to move into the suburbs.

My goodness, in no time the "less fortunates" will have surrounded the "well offs!" What a diabolical plan!

a reply to: Vroomfondel

It amazes me that seemingly intelligent people can read PART of an article from the Daily Caller (WITHOUT A LINK!) and accept it as truth, go off on a rampage, and convince other seemingly intelligent people that the President of the US is ordering people to move out of neighborhoods.

I'm just flabbergasted!

If ANYONE is interested in the TRUTH of this matter, there are many places to find it.

Or, you can continue to read lying, conservative rags and continue to fool yourselves into a tizzy.

If anyone IS interested in the truth...

The new rules, a top demand of civil-rights groups, will require cities and towns all over the country to scrutinize their housing patterns for racial bias and to publicly report, every three to five years, the results. Communities will also have to set goals, which will be tracked over time, for how they will further reduce segregation.

New Rule Targeting Segregation

HUD Furthering Fair Housing

Fair Housing Act Final Rule

I just took a week's break from ATS and this morning, all I've seen is ignorance is being nurtured and worshiped, instead of denied... So sickening!

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It either has no teeth and so is little more than a HUD boondoggle or the "goals" will be pushed by some means, usually the withholding of funds or forced zoning. Why have a goal if there is no push to reach it? Why should the government at all be concerned with where people choose to live? The problem with it is "targeting areas with no affordable housing". Shouldn't that be market driven?

This boils down to a philosophical and politcal debate on the nature of economic choice in a free society, how tax dollars are best spent and should the political objectives of a few be publicly subsidized by the many.

HUD, under any President or Political Party, has a horrible track record on almost any initiative they have had. See the 2008 housing crisis as just one...dubiously qualified applicants where rammed through the first time home buyers program for a decade prior to the market collapse - all in an effort to boost minority home ownership.

This just seems all backwards. Want to fix communities? Focus on education and jobs and then minorities will flood the middle class and better overall living conditions in an area will follow due to a greater tax base as well as aspirational middle class values shaping local politics.

It's going to happen because the towns that don't live up to what the federal government dictates will not receive those valuable grants and federal money. $$$ talk every time.

“HUD bureaucrats will be in a position to decide on their own whether your particular town meets their ideal of racial and income distribution,” said Hans von Sankovsky of the Heritage Foundation. “And if you don’t meet their ideal of that mix, you’re not going to get any money.www.latimes.com...

Julian Castro, HUD head, is being groomed big time. This issue is going to put the spotlight on him. Everyone will know his name by 2016...2020 at the latest.

I have watched once lovely neighborhoods become foreign places, places where English is hardly spoken, lawns become sand lots, doors and windows get covered with iron bars, good teachers leave and get replaced with teachers of lower standards, local businesses move out, graffiti litters the sides of buildings, and theft runs rampant.

The elderly folks are saddened that they can't even stroll through their once-safe community they moved into 50 years ago without fear of being robbed or beaten. They would move, but they're old, their property values have dropped, and the only places they could afford to live on their pensions are cesspools of the same.

These politicians that screw with the American populace live behind gated communities with armed guards. They are only concerned with votes....and right now? They are jonseing for the Latino vote. After all, they have brought tens of thousand of them into our country illegally and now they have to give them what they promised them.

Julian Castro, HUD Secy. --- watch him.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

a better question is how you are gonna get people not living in these slum areas to move in there??

the problem i have is people in poor neighborhoods having the worst educational opportunities, leading to poor job/career skills and leading to you guessed it higher crime. you really want to see a firestorm, ship the kids from more affluent neighborhoods to the schools in the hood. another point to be made is especially in urban areas the poor neighborhoods and crappy school are almost always in minority neighborhoods. kids should have access to equal opportunity when it comes to education.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Orders huh?

I don't usually pay attention to who my neighbors are...as long as the neighborhood isn't a !@#$hole, I'll be ok moving in.

If I see cars that are busted up, spiderwebs underneath, homes in disrepair and in need of paint, dead lawns/no lawns/landscaping...I'd not buy there - ever. Even if the boy who would be king commanded it.

Why?

That MFer can't tell me where to move, live or the like. Again, I don't interview the potential neighbors....

a reply to: Vroomfondel

in chicago we have the heroin highway where people from more affluent neighborhoods in the burbs go to buy heroin and other drugs so yeah in some cases you do have white people from the suburbs going into the inner city to commit crimes ie buy drugs. you know there are plenty of people from the suburbs committing crimes the difference being they have money for better lawyers and get off a lot of the time. there is also white collar criminals getting away w stuff because they have the money for high priced attorneys as well. so everything is not always black and white, there is good and bad everywhere some people are just better at getting away with it.

The posts in this thread are sickening. I never realized how many Americans are truly against anti-segregation. If you believe this will cause "more racism and violence" then you are apart of the problem.

And sorry, but your anecdotal evidence doesn't mean jack. "But in my neighborhood!" doesn't work here.

Funniest of all, I can guarantee most of you are white Americans, mostly from the South.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It never amazes me that seemingly unintelligent people pretend to know the facts, go off on a rant, and make fools of themselves in the process.

It amazes me that seemingly intelligent people can read PART of an article from the Daily Caller (WITHOUT A LINK!) and accept it as truth, go off on a rampage, and convince other seemingly intelligent people that the President of the US is ordering people to move out of neighborhoods.

I'm just flabbergasted!

If ANYONE is interested in the TRUTH of this matter, there are many places to find it.

Or, you can continue to read lying, conservative rags and continue to fool yourselves into a tizzy.

If anyone IS interested in the truth...

The new rules, a top demand of civil-rights groups, will require cities and towns all over the country to scrutinize their housing patterns for racial bias and to publicly report, every three to five years, the results. Communities will also have to set goals, which will be tracked over time, for how they will further reduce segregation.

So you read part of my OP, post part of an article (WITHOUT A LINK!) and then go on a rampage.

The first and second paragraph of this OP:

The Obama administration unveiled new rules Wednesday to rid the country of racially segregated neighborhoods by directing cities and towns to set goals for reducing segregation, and then regularly report their progress to the feds.

Communities nationwide will be given a series of questions designed to help them figure out whether racial bias is causing segregated neighborhoods, racial or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, unequal access to opportunity or disproportionate housing needs in their jurisdiction. They will be required to set goals related to that data and publicly report on their progress every three to five years.

The only difference between the paragraph you linked that is supposedly the "truth" I left out and the first two paragraphs of the OP is calling it a demand by civil rights groups. That is unsubstantiated and irrelevant.

I am not shocked or surprised though. This is liberal politics at its best. Carry on...

Oh, BTW, I thought name calling and other juvenile behavior was now frowned upon in the forums. Nice to know you get a pass on that...

originally posted by: HenryLee
I'm so outaged!!1!1!1! Why should our country work towards de-segregated communities? Nobody needs that leftist, liberal, nazi communism. There goes the neighbourhood, right guys? /s

Ok, are you volunteering to have the poor whites from the nearest meth-heavy trailer park integrated into your nice suburb in new, subsidized housing units?

Oh, you didn't think was what was being talked about as undesirable?

Well, I have to tell you. I don't want them any more than I want any other people who are from crime heavy areas relocated to my neighborhood. I don't care what they look like. I do care what kind of habits they are likely to bring with them.

Obama Orders Cities And Towns To Racially Integrate

So Obama wants to turn the entire country in to Detroit.

That's nice.

originally posted by: CB328

Why should our country work towards de-segregated communities?

What about people who don't want to live in de-segregated communities? Do they not have any rights?
Not discriminating in housing loans is one thing, but this is ridiculous.

Better tell Little,Tokyo, and Little Saigon,Little China and every other ethnic group across this country they have to 'de segragate'.

Funny that people think this only pertains to 'whites'.

That is going to go over well.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

You realize this COULD back fire right?

The goal is to create more anger and divisiveness among Americans. What if pushing for integration causes white and black people to finally become friends, and then they all realize the only group f'king them over is the 1%?

Just saying, think about it. This could be a good thing for us and bad thing for them.

a reply to: conspiracy nut

Certainly there are white people who commit crimes. I would never deny that. And there are some people from the suburbs who go into the city to buy drugs. I will not deny that either. But for the most part the violent crimes, drive-bys, car jacking, smash and grab, etc, are not committed by white people form the suburbs. That is done locally. It is black on black violence and is responsible for more black deaths than anything else by far.

There are parts of Chicago where you just don't go if you are white, especially at night. Buses wont go there. Fire Departments get shot at if they try to go there. Police don't go there unless they have massive numbers. You just don't do it. The police tell you when driving anywhere near some of these areas to roll the windows up, keep the doors locked, and do not stop at red lights or stop signs. Keep moving. You don't have to do that in the suburbs.

a reply to: WCmutant

That would be great, but I don't see it happening. We have had too many opportunities to get along already and it never seems to happen. Not as long as there are people who make a living keeping us divided anyway.