TECS @ TECN.TV

Tuesday, May 8, 2018

The High Cost of Failure: Liberal Politics As the Seed for Urban Economic Revolution


The High Cost of Failure: Liberal Politics 
As the Seed for Urban Economic Revolution


For many in the District of Columbia, the acceptable political narrative regarding the dissonance in economic development East of the Anacostia River versus West of the Anacostia River goes something like this:

Republicans have been working feverishly since the Revolutionary War to keep Black people down and to stunt any positive economic activity East of the Anacostia River.  The old white male GOP blockade all investment monies to East of the Anacostia River.  Thus, unemployment is high, wealth creation is stunted, and there are few positive economic outlets that can be created without sizable local government investment, a variation of tax, borrow, and spend.  If Republicans would just lend the Democrats unobtrusive management of the City of Washington's resources then, East of the River neighborhoods would see poverty reduced, safer streets, and greater sources of upward mobility established.

This is the camp song for those running throughout the City and, especially, East of the River.  There is not an nth of truth within its dissemination.  Yet, it makes people that have spent years in racial and political isolation feel better about their unchanging commitment to their beliefs, emotionally restrain doubters from resistance, and persecute without rebuke challengers to such bought thought.  The propaganda's acceptance as a mainstay has yielded two arguments that solidify economic instability and political dependency: (1) East of the River is gentrifying and (2) No one wants to Invest in East of the River Economic Development.  While we do not confer upon the DC City Council the responsibility of determining if Dr. Albert Einstein was a Jew, Christian or Atheist, we must ask the people of Washington why they will not defer to his assertion that "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".  The lack of openness on what makes a city and its people prosperous has as much to do with the high cost of failure in economically stimulating East of the River as the willful desire to sow again and again the seeds of progressive politics into the dusty shallows of Far Southeast and Far Northeast soils expecting the fruits of boom rather than husks of bust.

According to Dictionary.com, gentrification is (1) the buying and renovation of houses and stores in deteriorated urban neighborhoods by upper- or middle-income families or individuals, raising property values but often displacing low-income families and small businesses; and (2) the process of conforming to an upper- or middle-class lifestyle, or of making a product, activity, etc., appealing to those with more affluent tastes.  When one uses politics to explain away economic failure while maintaining political control, it is very easy for one to assert racial dissonance and disharmony while demanding diversity and to challenge those within the race to maintain their accord with poverty and its fruit that they may not be found in the harvest to be whiter than they need be.  In fact, East of the River Citizens possesses a most interesting dichotomy.  If they earn too little or have poor credit scores then, they will not qualify for the supplemental loans offered through the DC Housing and Community Department (DHCD) or Department of Small and Local Business Development (DSLBD).  However, if some citizens, based on racial infirmity based on political identity and poverty politics, earn enough then, they risk being outed or persecuted as "acting white".  A very tough allegation to disprove in the Court of Urban Public Opinion.  The defendant may not be invited to Big Mama's Cookout this summer or their favorite Greek organization activity at the local hotel no matter the rendering.

Heck, being prosperous is an ingrained threat to of the East of the River economic politic.  Chris Myers Asch, Washington History Editor, wrote in the Washington Informer: "In the next decade ["1990's"], as crack and crime consumed public housing projects and formerly middle-class apartment complexes alike, banks closed their branches, grocery stores pulled out, and landlords neglected upkeep, reinforcing the association of the term “east of the river” with poverty and crime.  That negative connotation has endured in the twenty-first century."  However, the economic catastrophe did not begin in the 1990's.  Asch continues, "As trailblazing African-American journalist Dorothy Gilliam observed, in the early 1980s, the area east of the river remained a “cacophony of contrasts,” with “acres of public housing and cheap apartments” as well as “$100,000 houses on cul-de-sacs.”  Yet in most parts of the city, the notion that the entire cityscape east of the river was a ghetto had hardened into incontrovertible common sense.  Reporters and residents alike referred to the entire area as “forgotten,” “neglected,” and “the other side of the tracks.”"  As things worsened, the talented tenth within the Left did what was best to insulate themselves from the stones to be thrown, blame the old, white male GOP and promise statehood.


Some will say: "Ken, you are conditioned to blame the Left.  You voted, along with 11% of Black men, for President Donald John Trump, Number 45.  You are an Urban Conservative.  You will always say that the problem is the affinity that impoverished Blacks and Hispanics have with the Socialists and Marxist stratagems for an economic revolution in the most wealth creation challenged districts.  You may say I am prejudiced, biased, or even askew with the postulations of the Left.  However, let us list those with direct government-centered economic impact on the East of the River Economy since the inception of the ruling body of the City of Washington, DC since the "District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973".

Mayor
Walter Washington (D), 1975-1979
Marion Barry (D), 1979-1991
Sharon Pratt Kelly (D), 1991-1995
Marion Barry (D), 1995-1999
Anthony A. Williams (D), 1999-2007
Adrian Fenty (D), 2007-2011
Vincent C. Gray (D), 2011-2015
Muriel Bowser (D), 2015-Present

Chairman
Sterling Tucker (D), 1975–1979
Arrington Dixon (D), 1979–1983
David A. Clarke (D), 1983–1991
John A. Wilson (D), 1991–1993
David A. Clarke (D), 1993–1997 (won special election after death of Wilson)
Linda W. Cropp (D), 1997–2007 (won special election after death of Clarke)
Vincent C. Gray (D), 2007–2011
Kwame R. Brown (D), 2011–2012
Phil Mendelson (D), 2012–Present (won special election after Brown resigned)

Ward 7 Member
Willie Hardy (D), 1975–1981
H. R. Crawford (D), 1981–1993
Kevin P. Chavous (D), 1993–2005
Vincent C. Gray (D), 2005–2007
Yvette Alexander (D), 2007–2017 (won special election after Gray became chairman)
Vincent C. Gray (D), 2017–Present

Ward 8 Member
James Coates (D), 1975–1977
Wilhelmina Rolark (D), 1977–1993
Marion Barry (D), 1993–1995
Eydie Whittington (D), 1995–1997 (won special election after Barry became mayor)
Sandy Allen (D), 1997–2005
Marion Barry (D), 2005–2014
LaRuby May (D), 2015–2017 (won special election after Barry died)
Trayon White (D), 2017–Present

There was no lapse of economic strength as a result of gender differences in leadership.  The District had 5 men and 2 women serve as Mayor and 8 men and 1 woman serve as Chairman of the City Council.  Within Ward 7, 4 men and 1 woman as Council members.  Within Ward 8, the most progressive, 4 women and 3 men have served as members.  Gender is not the problem.  The commonality is blatant and exhaustive.  Each of the Representatives has been elected under the Democrat banner.  Over four decades of Statist economic provocation and still, East of the River is outshone by West of the River in financial prosperity, economic development, academic successes, public safety, and overall liberty and freedom.


The Urban Institute (UI), in 1990, identified neighborhoods that can be classified as “challenged,” meaning that the neighborhood’s unemployment rate, the share of residents with less than a high school degree, and share of households headed by a single mother all exceed the citywide average by at least 20 percent.  Their findings were that 60 percent of challenged neighborhoods were located east of the Anacostia River.  Well, this must have changed significantly since the Democrats applied their intensive Marxist policies for "the least, the last, and the lost".  Right?  UI found overall, 28 neighborhoods were classified as challenged in both 2000 and 2006-2010, only 6 are located west of the river.

Things must have gotten better since over 90% of District voters supported the Democrat policies that doubled down on the Socialists' policies of the Left.  Right?  No.  The DC Fiscal Policy Institute (DCFPI) reported, September 2016, that "more D.C. Residents live in poverty than before the Great Recession".  DCFPI advised, "It's possible that low-income residents haven't been able to find better-paying jobs in the District's post-recession economy, or that certain jobs no longer exist here at all. It's also possible that within the black population, higher-income earners have moved elsewhere as others have stayed. At the same time, younger, more affluent newcomers are settling in D.C., driving the citywide median income up."  Amazing!  The same policies that made poor people poorer made rich people richer.  The same politicians that promoted these policies were lauded for their sense of inclusion while instituting the tools necessary for gentrification to be executed.  Yes, they even used race to provoke the poor to protest the same persons that the political establishment was subsidizing to move poor people out of their neighborhoods.  Even better, the same politicians that covet the glory of "an attack on me is an attack on the community" mentality capitalize at the voting booth on the ignorance, fear, and racial dissonance perpetuated as the means of protecting "the least, the last, and the lost" from their wealthy, white enemies.  Wow, it was not the old white male GOP after all.

You are out of line, Ken!

All of those people were working around the clock to pump monies into East of the River to improve the quality of life for everyone.  Really?  Asch writes, "Since 2000, the city has targeted the area for investment.  Yet the money that has flowed east of the Anacostia has been a pittance when compared to that devoted to the center city."  Indeed, the Bill of Goods has been sold to solidify potential personal gain for representatives that become former politicians at the expense of those single mothers that they once represented.  How well worn is are the material promises of the Left that after 4 decades that they would still be bought at hefty retail prices, marked up for tribal profiteering?  DCFPI, boldly without fear of protest or retaliation, recommends implementing policies that maintain the poverty most at risk.  DCFPI advises that the increase in concentrated poverty as a reason to support policies that would alleviate its burdens, like early childhood education subsidies so low-income workers could more easily arrange childcare, and make sure cash-assistance programs persist.  Not a desire to reduce regulations, lower taxes, or create a Free Market Wealth Creation Zone East of the River.  No, help the Poor remain comfortable in their Poverty.  That seems the most humane thing one can do.  We certainly can not create and protect the vessels of true economic development.  That would be supporting upward mobility and challenging the economic strength of the West of the River Neighborhoods.

The High Cost of Failure has been absolute for many in the Wards that I live and work.  Home-ownership is crippled because individual incomes and credit scored are too low.  Pols advise that they are doing everything that they can to squeeze the rich and give to the poor.  Trust me, if there was any truth to affordable housing then, there would be as many projects in Adams Morgan as there are East of the Anacostia River.  Rather than focusing on programs that could produce a "maximum income effort", the Leftists double down on presenting to those injured by economic productivity in other areas of the City the false premises of affordable housing.  Yes, Donald Trump Haters, try building a homeless shelter in Wards 1, 2, and 3 without a parking garage or Jacuzzi.  Ask the Mayor of Economics if it is even financially possible, in reality.  Unemployment is four times higher East of the River than West of the River.  Local governmental lobbyists believe that if the District would spend more money on training those without diplomas or degrees to spread bed sheets upon luxury mattresses in the local hotels that will provide their pol supporters campaign finance then, Ward 7 and 8 citizens will be better off.  In fact, these pols discourage economic activity East of the River by raising the "minimum wage" thus, penalizing smaller businesses that are already squeezed out of the Main Street economy.  Abandon the transportation industry, trucking, railroad and others, that have nearly 1.2 million jobs that would pay twice a livable wage if the poorest were trained to be employed for the splendor of the campaign funds of the hospitality industry.  Who could this practice possibly hurt?  Yes, only a liberal will tell you to raise the "minimum wage" when you have a "maximum income" problem.


Is it Racial?

According to DCFPI, Black people are the only racial or ethnic group in the District to experience an increase in the poverty rate since before the recession comprising roughly three-fourths of all D.C. residents living in poverty.  This would lead you to believe that it was.  No, it is economic and political.  The Seed for Urban Economic Revolution will not be found in the writings of Karl Marx or political leanings of former President Barack Obama.  Only a people that are willing to forbid the practice of the past four decades and embrace the principles of finance, education, and economics will excel and produce a great inheritance for those to come.  It is only racial when the majority of Blacks refuse to accept the truths that would free them from the economic confines of poverty.  Yes, that would be a black on black crime if there was ever one to behold.





An Urban Conservative Whose Mission Is to Spread the Good News of Christianity, Conservatism, Capitalism, Constitutionalism, and Individual Sovereignty throughout the World.  Devoted to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, He Believes that in Order to Save the United States, We Must Mutually Pledge Our Lives, Our Fortunes, and Our Sacred Honor to Save Urban America.





1 comment: