19-06-2016: j reacts to silence about taxation as a distributive tool during gentrification debates

if chinese investors want to come in and drive up property taxes, the truth is that that benefits everybody in the long run. you just need to get those property taxes spent on transit options and real estate developers looking towards more modest developments. i've never understood the arguments against gentrification; the focus should be on pushing governments to help people adapt to gentrification by ensuring that the money gets (re)distributed fairly.

that said, there's no excuse for idle property and i would support laws against idling property.

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouvers-housing-affordability-crisis-making-neighbourhoods-inhospitable-for-middle-class-trudeau

i've run into some anti-gentrification activists in detroit, and they just end up spinning themselves around in circles.

you realize that the source of the problem in detroit is that the city has no tax base, right?

"yes"

so, you must realize that the city should be doing everything it possibly can to bring back it's tax base, then?

"it's destroying the character of the city."

well, the "character of the city" is literal urban decay. the city is falling apart.

"we need to spend more on infrastructure, and our schools are falling apart and .... "

but, you're bankrupt because you don't have a tax base.

"absolutely true."

so, shouldn't you be trying to attract wealthier people to the city?

"no, because it will change the city."

but, the city is falling apart. shouldn't it change?

"absolutely. we should be spending millions on ..."

but you're bankrupt.

"yup."

so, shouldn't you be trying to attract wealthier property owners?

"no. because ..."

eventually, i provide an answer.

ok. i understand that gentrification destroys neighbourhoods. but, then why don't we take that tax money and build new social housing?

"that's....that's...that's communism!"

i thought you were an anarchist?

"sure. but, you'll never get city council to agree."

so, you've deduced that you're better off barricading out the wealthy and trying to be happy in poverty, then.

"we need to spend more money on schools. that will help us out of poverty."

i see.

see, in canada we actually do this: we tax the rich to build low income housing projects. we build neighbourhoods with both types of housing. it's not weird to us. you'll hear the odd grumble about communism, but most of us don't mind. so, we don't really have the debate about gentrification. it does seep it's way up here, but it's usually badly applied by the clueless and generally doesn't actually make any sense because you're usually actually talking about city owned property. and, in the rare circumstance when you actually are talking about market rents, the real issue is that the city has a really long wait to get into subsidized housing - and that what the city needs is not a stop on development but a boost in it.

19-06-2016: j reacts to the clinton machine's strategic objective to destroy bernie sanders

he shouldn't back down from this.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/bernie-sanders-black-caucus-superdelegates-224502

if the black caucus wants to uphold an undemocratic process for their own benefit, let them do that.

i think the focus should be making them articulate that, not buckling to "minority rights".

the reality is that the black caucus is pretty much the most conservative wing of the whole party. they're not allies of anybody but the establishment and the status quo. not only should he not shy away from articulating this, but he should accentuate his articulation of this - with the end goal of black caucus replacement.

what has the black caucus done for blacks recently? not a whole lot. get that out there. get some turnover.

so, if they want to go after him for the purposes of media optics, he should take them on. first, he doesn't really have a choice. second, it's a noble goal, anyways.

and if the party splits? so be it. i'm sick of right-wing democrats, and i realize that the black vote is a big part of the reason that we have such a hard time getting a liberal nominee. that split might be required to get a serious liberal nominee, and if it is i'll take the split over the big tent. the big tent is a dead end...

i think he can get some turnover - or at least be a serious enough of a threat for turnover to get them to back down.

i need to be clear: if he can get some turnover in the black caucus and force it to the left, it could be the single most important thing he accomplishes.

go after them.

https://newrepublic.com/article/130930/congressional-black-caucus-lost-conscience

"We don't argue this to be controversial or because we are on the side of the criminal. We argue this because our sole focus as a charity is to reduce crime and reduce the number of victims of crime. If prison were the answer to high reoffending rates, particularly for acquisitive crime, we would argue for more prisons. But the evidence clearly points us in the opposite direction."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/16/longer-prison-sentences-civitas

18-06-2016: beginning the process of reconstruction (but vlog does not reflect...)

tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1

http://musicofjessicamurray.blogspot.ca/

http://musicofjessicamurray.blogspot.com/2016/06/blog-post.html

the rebuild begins today.

j reacts (dvd 2)

j reacts to al franken as vice president

this is the first name that i've seen thrown around that i think is better than a terrible choice.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/16/sen-al-franken-as-hillary-vp-would-drive-trump-crazy-ex-bill-clinton-aide.html

sometimes, i think what hillary really needs is a good pep talk.

yeah. i like this.

this is the exact way that you beat donald trump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M84Q6yf7mo8