New Orleans goes Violent

[Shintao]

Yep, we got police kicking it up a notch and people kicking it up a notch, and luckily the protest is about some ol buildings and not something to do with Washington DC or the White House. The Revolution is coming folks with the prepetrated violence of the Wars, deaths, torture, wounded, millions of them. Like Kent State, people are going to be dying for America. It just a matter of time.

But! Oh, that has nothing to do with the article does it. How Humbug can the government get at Christmas time?

NEW ORLEANS (Dec. 20) - Police used chemical spray and stun guns Thursday on protesters who tried to force their way into a City Council meeting, the latest strife over plans to demolish some 4,500 public housing units in a redevelopment project that council members ended up unanimously supporting.

Police said 15 people were arrested on charges ranging from battery to disorderly conduct. Four people were taken to hospitals — two of them women who had been stunned with Tasers — and five others were injured and treated on the scene, police said. All four in the hospital were stable, police said.

Protesters said they pushed against the iron gates that kept them out of the building because the Housing Authority of New Orleans had disproportionately allowed supporters of the demolition to pack the chambers. Dozens tried to force their way in.

At the peak of the confusion, some 70 protesters were facing about a dozen mounted police and 40 more law enforcement officers on foot.

One woman was sprayed by police and dragged from the gates; emergency workers took her away on a stretcher. Another woman said she was stunned by officers, and still had what appeared to be a Taser wire hanging from her shirt.

"I was just standing, trying to get into my City Council meeting," said the dazed woman, Kim Ellis, who was taken away in an ambulance.

"Is this what democracy looks like?" Bill Quigley, a Loyola University law professor who opposes demolition, said as he held a strand of Taser wire he said had been shot into another of the protesters.

Quigley said he believed the crackdown violated public meetings laws.

After roughly 30 minutes of on-again-off-again struggle to get into the meeting, protesters fell back, continuously chanting with bullhorns. An afternoon storm thinned the demonstrators, some of whom had been waiting since 7 a.m. to enter, and the crowd disappeared altogether shortly after the afternoon vote.


VIDEO & Article here; http://tinyurl.com/yudleu

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/police-protesters-clash-in-new-orleans/20071220134909990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

[K-D-K-D-K]

This is really good news for the city. They will demolish the old projects that were run down and infested with crime.

[Pookie]

Whoa! This isn't good. Were the housing units damaged from Katrina or are they just being razed because some developer is greedy?
Purrs,
Pookie

[AnnEsthesia]

I am guessing this is one of those "community revitalization" projects that winds up just being a means to rid an area of low-income (and therefore low tax) housing.

[Mark L Hamburger]

Well, the projects weren't exactly in great shape before Katrina, I can't imagine they are in good shape now.

[lily]

Whoa! This isn't good. Were the housing units damaged from Katrina or are they just being razed because some developer is greedy?
Purrs,
Pookie



After Katrina. I've got mixed feelings on this......first off, it's 2 years, what's the hold up, this should have been done a year ago. Second it's mixed housing, both middle class and poor......I don't know how they are going to do that........make smaller houses for the poor?

[Pookie]

Heck if I know, Lily, this has got me puzzled. You would think that after all the horrible damage Katrina caused to houses and apartments and all, they would want to save anything existing intact and useable, be it for poor and needy or whatever. I don't know.
Purrs,
Pookie

[Mark L Hamburger]

The meeting itself was mostly peaceful, although an early fight in the chambers between protesters and police caused a brief interruption.

Some public housing residents repeated during the daylong debate that they welcome the plan to replace the decades-old structures with mixed-income, mixed-use development. Other residents and their advocates said they fear the plan will result in the loss of badly needed housing for the city's low-income black residents.

The vote crossed racial lines, with the three black council members joining four whites.

Most of the units HUD plans to demolish are vacant, and many suffered heavy damage in Hurricane Katrina, but those who oppose their demolition say they should be improved instead.

Critics of the plan say it will drive poor people from neighborhoods where they have lived for generations, but HUD denies that and says the plan will create an equal amount of affordable housing as existed before Katrina hit.

[lily]

http://img.youtube.com/vi/uCpLa-33iEg/2.jpg

Would you live here? Is this worth saving?

[Mark L Hamburger]

That's kind of what I was thinking, lily. Why would anyone want to save that when they're offering brand new housing?

[ViolaLee]

There are still people living in FEMA trailors.

What new housing?

The 50 houses that Brad Pitt is building?

1% of the money from the feds has been spent after Katrina. Out of ONE BILLION dollars promised, they've spent one hundred million, and it was mostly on administrative costs.

What new housing?

The people who lived in those projects can't afford to live in the housing they will build there.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/01/following-katrinas-money-trail.html

[Shintao]

That's kind of what I was thinking, lily. Why would anyone want to save that when they're offering brand new housing?


So you would leave your home for a brand new government home?

I really don't think they have a choice anyway.

[Pookie]

Maybe those structures could be renovated. I don't know. And FEMA trailers! Isn't it a really bad idea to put so many trailers in a place that has been whacked by a Cat 4 hurricane? Imagine what would happen to those trailers if another Katrina nailed the Gulf Coast.
Geez!
Purrs,
Pookie

[potter]

The people who lived in those projects can't afford to live in the housing they will build there.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/01/following-katrinas-money-trail.html



I suspect that is the general goal.....

Americans have a funny view of money. We worship the wealthy deserved or not, and condemn the poor, deserved or not.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Since this is a HUD project, I don't really have anything good to say.

I am sure HUD will find a way to mess things up far worse than they already are.

[AnnEsthesia]

As long as they build low income housing, it is fine. The problem is that usually with these projects, what is built are too expensive for the former residents to afford and so the poor are effectively pushed out of the area.

[Mia]

No offense to the posters before me, but I'm not sure that whether the housing should stand is the primary issue here.

What I took from this was that people trying to get into a meeting that is supposed to be open to the public were tasered, and driven off by police.

This is one of the increasing number of examples of how our government is beginning to behave more as a dictatorship, hushing dissent, and less like the free nation it's supposed to be.

[Shintao]

No offense to the posters before me, but I'm not sure that whether the housing should stand is the primary issue here.

What I took from this was that people trying to get into a meeting that is supposed to be open to the public were tasered, and driven off by police.

This is one of the increasing number of examples of how our government is beginning to behave more as a dictatorship, hushing dissent, and less like the free nation it's supposed to be.


This goes to the heart of my hypothesis that violence creates more violence, and it esculates according to the amount of violence being used. Good examples of violence by police can be seen by googling up war protesters. Citizens protesting are often abused unnecessarily by police. Citizens protesting often leads to property destruction afterwards.[hr]


The people who lived in those projects can't afford to live in the housing they will build there.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/01/following-katrinas-money-trail.html



I suspect that is the general goal.....

Americans have a funny view of money. We worship the wealthy deserved or not, and condemn the poor, deserved or not.


It is only a state of mind, being created by the rightwind to further their aim of cutting social programs and enhancing the corporate base and rich in America. You will see a new effort to reverse this under the Democrat power machine when given full reign of Congress & the WH in 08'. We are the most uncaring nation of our people in the industrial world.

[potter]

No offense to the posters before me, but I'm not sure that whether the housing should stand is the primary issue here.

What I took from this was that people trying to get into a meeting that is supposed to be open to the public were tasered, and driven off by police.

This is one of the increasing number of examples of how our government is beginning to behave more as a dictatorship, hushing dissent, and less like the free nation it's supposed to be.


This goes to the heart of my hypothesis that violence creates more violence, and it esculates according to the amount of violence being used. Good examples of violence by police can be seen by googling up war protesters. Citizens protesting are often abused unnecessarily by police. Citizens protesting often leads to property destruction afterwards.[hr]


The people who lived in those projects can't afford to live in the housing they will build there.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/01/following-katrinas-money-trail.html



I suspect that is the general goal.....

Americans have a funny view of money. We worship the wealthy deserved or not, and condemn the poor, deserved or not.


It is only a state of mind, being created by the rightwind to further their aim of cutting social programs and enhancing the corporate base and rich in America. You will see a new effort to reverse this under the Democrat power machine when given full reign of Congress & the WH in 08'. We are the most uncaring nation of our people in the industrial world.



I'm not so sure if we're so uncaring or just so self absorbed we're not paying attention. I also am disturbed at the propensity of government and political candidates to pick and chose who has a right to participate and question thier actions, and to use violence and pain to quell public protest.

They make the rules
They make the rules on how to comment on the rules
They make the rules on punshiment if you break their rules
They grant themselves immunity for the rules they make
That take your hard earned money with no regard to circumstance
and blow it on shit you would never support

I truly believe our federal government is our own worst enemy.

[Mia]

I'm not so sure if we're so uncaring or just so self absorbed we're not paying attention.


What's the difference?:sadly:

[Keith Hamburger]

1% of the money from the feds has been spent after Katrina. Out of ONE BILLION dollars promised, they've spent one hundred million, and it was mostly on administrative costs.

Umm ... That doesn't sound quite right. Am I missing something here?

Did you pick this up from someone else or did you try to do your own math?

Keith

note: this isn't to say that I support what the current administration has done in this situation but in a lot of ways they've got it wrong both ways. As Davey Crockett said when he served in Congress, they have no right to spend our money like that in the first place. And, what they are spending they're just screwing away and likely making things worse.[hr]
Maybe those structures could be renovated. I don't know. And FEMA trailers! Isn't it a really bad idea to put so many trailers in a place that has been whacked by a Cat 4 hurricane? Imagine what would happen to those trailers if another Katrina nailed the Gulf Coast.
Geez!
Purrs,
Pookie


Well, if it were me and a hurricane were coming I would hook the trailer to my pickup and go somewhere else.

But, that's just me. I tend to be more proactive in that way.

Keith

[apdst]

Anyone who is in favor of saving the New Orleans housing projects should take a trip to New Orleans and visit the housing projects. If you make it out, alive, I'm sure you're attitude will be much different.

All I have to say to the former tennents--if you wanna call them that--is, if you don't like it...get a job!

The problem is that usually with these projects, what is built are too expensive for the former residents to afford

If the rent were anything other than free, the former residents wouldn't be able to afford the new housing.

[Elrathin]

The conservatives way is let's kick people on the streets and create even more criminals. Great idea if you are retarded.

[apdst]

The conservatives way is let's kick people on the streets and create even more criminals.


Giving them free room and board for three+ generations has been an obvious failure.

When an entire city, regardless of race, want to see housing projects removed, that's got to tell you something.

Anyone that thinks that places like Melphamine and Magnolia housing projects are cute little neighborhoods filled with po' fokes has never been to New Orleans. They're the same people that live in safe, little, white-collar neighborhoods where nothing bad ever happens.

[Elrathin]

Anyone that thinks that places like Melphamine and Magnolia housing projects are cute little neighborhoods filled with po' fokes has never been to New Orleans. They're the same people that live in safe, little, white-collar neighborhoods where nothing bad ever happens.


Hmmm let's see, having a house or living on the streets. What's better? No, sorry, it's the people that live in safe, little, white-collar neighborhoods where nothing bad ever happens, that are saying it's better to live on the streets than in a housing projects.

It's the same uncaring attitudes we see over and over again from many conservatives. Since they don't live in the situation they could care less. As long as they are making money over people's suffering is all they care about.

[apdst]

It's the same uncaring attitudes we see over and over again from many conservatives.

I have no regard for someone who refuses to get a job and better their life, all the while complaining about how bad their life is and blaming it on everyone but his, or herself.

The solution is simple: get off the drugs, get and education and get a job. The education is simple, it's free!

Since they don't live in the situation they could care less. As long as they are making money over people's suffering is all they care about.

The real situation quite the opposite. The Liberals will lose millions of votes and dollars if the poor folks--especially poor blacks--were to suddenly improve their lives.

And, you're right, I don't live in the situation. Why? Because I have a job. I don't steal. I don't murder my own people over a street corner from which to sell crack.

[Elrathin]

I have no regard for someone who refuses to get a job and better their life, all the while complaining about how bad their life is and blaming it on everyone but his, or herself.

Not everyone living in those situations is without a job nor are they all drug addicts. But then to most conservatives, they don't care, they would rather act like they are high and mighty looking down on the peons.


The real situation quite the opposite. The Liberals will lose millions of votes and dollars if the poor folks--especially poor blacks--were to suddenly improve their lives.

Yep living on the streets is a big improvement. :rolleyes:


And, you're right, I don't live in the situation. Why? Because I have a job. I don't steal. I don't murder my own people over a street corner from which to sell crack.


Show me where ALL those people do not have jobs or are not trying. Show me. Until then your words mean less and less.

And you claiming that everyone that lives in projects is either a thief, lazy, or murderer is disgusting but shows that many conservatives are simply out of tune with reality.

[K-D-K-D-K]

The New Orleans City Council are basically all Democrats including the black council members who represent the lower 9th ward and other dysfunctional parts of the city where projects sit. Now is the time to wipe them out and in the future it will be seen as best thing that could have been done for the city. People are scared to come back and set up businesses because of the crime rate stemming from these neighborhoods. This will be in the best interest of the taxpaying citizens that WORK. Not the other way around for those who DON'T WORK. I'm sorry but the Good of the Many outweigh the Needs of the Few. Ah the future looks so bright down the road that I can just envision good honest working ethical moral people living in what was crime ridden areas conquered by Welfare Blacks, Druggies and Prostitutes making a living and paying their taxes and sending their kids to good schools in the rezoned districts after the storm. The Purge is on to rid these complexes and I am for it.

[micfranklin]

I just love how you make it seem as though all the poor people need to be rid of like genocide or something: you don't like them so they gotta go.

What do you purpose we do with the poor people after they are "wiped out," assuming that would happen? They have to live somewhere.

[K-D-K-D-K]

I just love how you make it seem as though all the poor people need to be rid of like genocide or something: you don't like them so they gotta go.

What do you purpose we do with the poor people after they are "wiped out," assuming that would happen? They have to live somewhere.

They will have to restructure their lives and get training at community colleges or some type of training programs that can teach them job skills to learn to weed themselves off government welfare handouts. Reality for them having to do this is going to be terrifying for them but in the long run it should work. It can be done if they put their minds to it since we are all born with a brain at birth. They have just never adapted theirs for work. They were brought up and programmed by their parents who were just like them to expect welfare as a way of life. Its generational. Its time for the umbilical cord to be cut and for them to fend for themselves just like every other taxpaying American. Where they will live is anyone's guess and I suspect the council thought that over as well and decided what I have surmised about the situation. I go to New Orleans and the surrounding area to check on my Oil and Gas wells every week and drive through the destruction and black crime ridden infested areas on some excursions and witness it first hand. All they are doing is sitting on porches drinking malt liquor and hanging out at the corner liquor store drunk or doped up while packing a pistol. The council has made the desicion and it is the right one. the city was purged of the most hardcore criminals after the storm and some have returned to use these projects as their turf. Also in consideration is the illegal immigrants that invading the city after the storm. That also was considered and theyto will also be back on foot hopefully headed back across the border. Maybe they can encourage the blacks to follow them down with them to learn how to make tomales or something and learn how to use a peso.. First thing is first though, they need to teach the blacks how to swim because they will need to cross the Rio Grande because their swimming skills or lack of showed when they were seen floating dead in the streets by the Superdome and the 9th Ward. Yea that is a good Idea to send them to Mexico although I doubt they would be granted citizenship. Anyway, bottom line for their solution is to GET AN EDUCATION AND A JOB and quit relying on the Government for Handouts.

[micfranklin]

I don't know why but some of what you said seems to be very well thought out, but "purging" or "wiping out" the poor people isn't necessary. Remodeling the area and cutting taxes on the middle and lower class would be a bigger help.[/align]

[K-D-K-D-K]

Remodeling the area and cutting taxes on the middle and lower class would be a bigger help.[/align]
It will be remodeled but with better housing and higher rent for mixed income families if they can afford it. Look we are talking about a mini marshall plan that will totally change the landscape and housing in the area. Parks will be were neighborhoods once were and more green will be included in flood zones.

[apdst]

Not everyone living in those situations is without a job nor are they all drug addicts.

Well, you're half right; they're not all drug addicts. However, people who live in government housing don't have a job, OR work just enough not to lose their subsidies.

Yep living on the streets is a big improvement.

I've been to the worst housing projects in the country. It would depend on which street you live on, but living on the street would be a big improvement. There are quite a few streets that one could live on where one doesn't have to worry about getting hit by the cross fire, unlike the projects.

Show me where ALL those people do not have jobs or are not trying. Show me. Until then your words mean less and less.


I can't prove a negative, so why don't you show me where they are looking for work, or working. I can show you plenty of low income folks that do have jobs and don't live in government housing.


And you claiming that everyone that lives in projects is either a thief, lazy, or murderer is disgusting but shows that many conservatives are simply out of tune with reality.

You forgot drug dealer. Tell us about your personal experiences with it.

[firefox]

Ending restrictions on business (min wage, bans on selling various non harmful products, licensing, etc) would make it a LOT easier for the lower classes to get a good start on supporting themselves. We want to make the barriers to entry as low as possible, right?

[apdst]

Ending restrictions on business (min wage, bans on selling various non harmful products, licensing, etc) would make it a LOT easier for the lower classes to get a good start on supporting themselves

There are no licensing procedures, or product bans stopping anyone from going to work at Wal-Mart. A person doesn't have to start his/her own business to go to work and make money. There are literally millions of jobs that only require a valid SSN.

The biggest thing they'll need, is a will to work.

[Elrathin]

Well, you're half right; they're not all drug addicts. However, people who live in government housing don't have a job, OR work just enough not to lose their subsidies.

So in other words you can't prove it's their fault. Thank you for showing that.


I've been to the worst housing projects in the country. It would depend on which street you live on, but living on the street would be a big improvement. There are quite a few streets that one could live on where one doesn't have to worry about getting hit by the cross fire, unlike the projects.

Yep warm roof over your head is so much worse than living out on the streets. What a moronic comment for you to make. Considering you just said you have never lived in the projects, your comments show you know nothing. If you think living on the streets is better than living in the projects you must NEVER have known poverty, that much is certain.


I can't prove a negative, so why don't you show me where they are looking for work, or working. I can show you plenty of low income folks that do have jobs and don't live in government housing.

You are the one that said they don't work so you go ahead and prove your accusations. You made them not me.



You forgot drug dealer. Tell us about your personal experiences with it.


Again I have had many many friends and relatives that have lived in the projects, when you show experience otherwise let me know. Until then I consider you just another nobody conservative that could give a shit about the less unfortunate and more about how you can make money off them. You are nothing to me and the reason I continue to fight against most conservatives. Most conservatives only care for how much money they can make and nothing more. It is the reason most conservatives SUPPORT sending jobs overseas. They are the most UN-AMERICAN pieces of shit America has ever seen. If they die out, the sooner, the better.

[Pookie]

Work at Wal-Mart? I don't know anyone who works at Wal-Mart (except for waaay upper management) who makes a wage they can actually live on. I hear this a lot from conservatives who mean well: "McDonald's is hiring." Right. Part-time hours (less than 25 hours a week) at $6.15 an hour.
Yeah, boy, they're really going to give up their benefits for that. The problem is, the government had a plan for people in poverty: housing projects, welfare, food stamps, etc.
What they forgot to do was provide an exit plan, like job training, smart money management, and programs to help these people get educations. They dumped them into the projects and ignored the rest of the idea.
How is it poor people's fault when the government won't help them get on their feet and instead throw money at them, stick them in these "bad" neighborhoods and hope they'll shut up?
Sad. The whole system needs a major overhaul.
Purrs,
Pookie

[preservanation]

I agree to some extent, Pookie.
The key to a livable wage is job experience.
Min wage jobs are not intended to support a family of four, but they are important to give youth incentive to get that experience...they are also nice for those who are on a fixed income or SSI and can only work so many hours without jeopardizing benefits.
If you are 22 or older and are only qualified to take a min wage job, who's fault is that? You should have spent less time effin around and more time acquiring skillz to pay the billz.
My niece is a single mom (dad killed in car accident), she has two kids, wants to work and is qualified, but if she makes too much, the State takes away her child care benefits, which far outweigh the extra $$ she would make. The way that the system is structured de-incentifies many people working. They throw up their hands and sit on the couch and watch Oprah...why not, it's easier than working? It's almost like the state doesn't want them to work, even when it's more expensive for them (us) when people don't.

An observation I have made over the years is that a lot of entry level positions in my field (service industry) are taken up by Mexicans, legal and illegal, and not by high school kids as they were in the past.
It makes good business sense from my position, but I worry where American youth are going to get their first leg-up in the world of working for a living.
Without experience or demonstrating that one is responsible enough to actually show up when scheduled and to follow direction...businesses are hesitant to welcome one into their fold with anything more than the minimum pay.

[lily]

Ending restrictions on business (min wage, bans on selling various non harmful products, licensing, etc) would make it a LOT easier for the lower classes to get a good start on supporting themselves

There are no licensing procedures, or product bans stopping anyone from going to work at Wal-Mart. A person doesn't have to start his/her own business to go to work and make money. There are literally millions of jobs that only require a valid SSN.

The biggest thing they'll need, is a will to work.


Well.........I'm glad to see you changed your position from post #26 that all poor people don't work. I checked and LA is a work for welfare state. Don't work.......don't get paid. Now I know it's nice to sit behind a computer screen and say well........all they need to do is get an education and work their way up. It's a nice thought, but not everyone is able to do this, either by lack of early education or the time away from taking care of their families.......so I ask you. Which one would you prefer? Poor people getting subsidized for cheap housing, or the money Wal-Mart or McDonalds will pay for an illegal?[hr]
Also in consideration is the illegal immigrants that invading the city after the storm. That also was considered and theyto will also be back on foot hopefully headed back across the border. Maybe they can encourage the blacks to follow them down with them to learn how to make tomales or something and learn how to use a peso..

You know........I think I'm going to agree with you on this one.......all those illegals did have to go home, after Halliburton got caught hiring them for cheap wages, then charging the government full price. If they would have hired actual poor citizens.........or any citizen for that matter, things would have been done by now.




[hr]
It will be remodeled but with better housing and higher rent for mixed income families if they can afford it. Look we are talking about a mini marshall plan that will totally change the landscape and housing in the area. Parks will be were neighborhoods once were and more green will be included in flood zones.


Thanks for the laugh KD.....I remember how the only lights in New Orleans were the camera and crew set up in a nice clean safe place, to make things look all sanitized for Bush to make his speech that New Oreleans would be re-built bigger and better, with housing for everybody.......including the poor............then he took his lights and left, leaving them in the dark.

It's been two years, and it seems the only thing that has been re-built is the rich and tourist traps...........to hell with anyone else!

[hr]
I agree to some extent, Pookie.
The key to a livable wage is job experience.
Min wage jobs are not intended to support a family of four, but they are important to give youth incentive to get that experience...they are also nice for those who are on a fixed income or SSI and can only work so many hours without jeopardizing benefits.

I have to agree with this......when making out work schedules, it did piss me off that people who did want to work couldn't because they would lose their benefits. That part of the system needs to be changed. People that want to work, should be rewarded and not punnished.

My niece is a single mom (dad killed in car accident), she has two kids, wants to work and is qualified, but if she makes too much, the State takes away her child care benefits, which far outweigh the extra $$ she would make. The way that the system is structured de-incentifies many people working. They throw up their hands and sit on the couch and watch Oprah...why not, it's easier than working? It's almost like the state doesn't want them to work, even when it's more expensive for them (us) when people don't.

Then you niece is part of the problem?

The bottom line is, that those that are complaining about low paying jobs are the ones that probably were complaining about the rise in minimus wage.......and those that are complaining about low paying jobs are the ones that use their service the most and don't realize that we can't live without those workers.

[apdst]

Well.........I'm glad to see you changed your position from post #26 that all poor people don't work.

Lily,

I never said that poor people don't work. My parents were poor as field mice and they worked like dogs their whole lives. My dad died AT work. So, I am fully aware that poor people work. At the same time, there are poor people who don't work. Those are the folks that I'm referring to. Several other members have mentioned that Wal-Mart's and or McDonalds' wages aren't enough to raise a family on and they're absolutely right. However, that's no excuse for not trying to provide for one's family. The fact is, that a person with a high school diploma has a mediocre chance of knocking down 40g's+ a year. Someone with a GED has an even smaller chance and someone with no high school credentials might as well be prepared to make minimum wage most of their lives, unless they are doing something that is hot,dirty and dangerous.

The industry that I work in offers oppurtunities for folks who have less than college level educations to make some serious wages. The hands that I employ in my humble business bring home annual salaries ranging from 42 to 49 grand. I have one man that has a high school diploma. The rest have GEDs, or nothing at all. But, again, their job consists of long, hot, dirty and dangerous work. An 18 hour day isn't rare. I've had guys bitch about the work conditions in the past. My response, is for them to either get a degree and get a better job, or pick up an application at Wal-Mart. There's tons of oppurtunities out there. A person only has to have the gumption to go get it. My dad used to say, "to make money you have to have talent, or tits."

[quote]It's been two years, and it seems the only thing that has been re-built is the rich and tourist traps...........to hell with anyone else!

It's called, "The Road Home Program", and you can thank the former worst governer of Louisiana for that charlie-foxtrot.

all those illegals did have to go home, after Halliburton got caught hiring them for cheap wages, then charging the government full price.

What about the no bid contracts and hiring of illegals by Shaw Global? Are you as equally appalled? Just so this can't be called flame bait, I'll tell you why I ask. Jim Bernhard is the CEO of Shaw Global. Jim Bernhard is also the ex-Democrat HNIC in Louisiana.

[Mia]

A lot of people living in state housing are physically or mentally disabled. So 'get a job' isn't the answer.

[apdst]

A lot of people living in state housing are physically or mentally disabled. So 'get a job' isn't the answer.

Mia,

Obviously there are exceptions. I agree that there are folks that aren't physically, or mentally able to support themselves financially. The people I'm referring to are the ones that are able to work.

[lily]

Lily,

I never said that poor people don't work. My parents were poor as field mice and they worked like dogs their whole lives. My dad died AT work. So, I am fully aware that poor people work. At the same time, there are poor people who don't work. Those are the folks that I'm referring to. Several other members have mentioned that Wal-Mart's and or McDonalds' wages aren't enough to raise a family on and they're absolutely right. However, that's no excuse for not trying to provide for one's family. The fact is, that a person with a high school diploma has a mediocre chance of knocking down 40g's+ a year. Someone with a GED has an even smaller chance and someone with no high school credentials might as well be prepared to make minimum wage most of their lives, unless they are doing something that is hot,dirty and dangerous.

Well.....apdst.......you may not like it and I may not like it......but the fact still remains that there are poor and un-educated people in America. Blaming everything on what a few do, not work and collect welfare is only a small fraction of those that do need welfare to live. It's just the bad apples that get the publicity.



It's called, "The Road Home Program", and you can thank the former worst governer of Louisiana for that charlie-foxtrot.

Blame it on who you want, or what you want......you are still going to need someone willing to clean toilets and I'd rather subsidize and American than an illegal.


What about the no bid contracts and hiring of illegals by Shaw Global? Are you as equally appalled? Just so this can't be called flame bait, I'll tell you why I ask. Jim Bernhard is the CEO of Shaw Global. Jim Bernhard is also the ex-Democrat HNIC in Louisiana.

Yes........but what I'm more appalled at is the lack of progress after 2 years.

[apdst]

not work and collect welfare is only a small fraction of those that do need welfare to live.

I disagree that the loafers make up a small fraction.

Blame it on who you want, or what you want......you are still going to need someone willing to clean toilets and I'd rather subsidize and American than an illegal.

We can blame the people that should be blamed. Or does that only count for Republicans??


Yes........but what I'm more appalled at is the lack of progress after 2 years.

Have you been to New Orleans since the storm?[/quote]

[K-D-K-D-K]

We just had our money release and also the reason it was held up was because Bush had vetoed a bill with billions that was approved for New Orleans and the levees and Congress just had a override of the Bill. Also the treasury didn't want to release any mony because they didn't want Louisiana earnng interest on it while the money was being dispursed. Another reason was the red tape from the federal government. The Insurance companies had to have regulations passed that would require all building codes be changed along the coast of Louisiana that would make homes have to be raised and rebuilt a certain way. Its all been the feds that has held the money up. Here is our beloved Sen. Mary Landrieus website that shows we just now recieved the money.


http://landrieu.senate.gov/hrt/index.cfm

[lily]

I disagree that the loafers make up a small fraction.

Well, I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I've seen different as I imagine you have.

Blame it on who you want, or what you want......you are still going to need someone willing to clean toilets and I'd rather subsidize and American than an illegal.

We can blame the people that should be blamed. Or does that only count for Republicans??

Huh? What does that have to do with what I was talking about?




Have you been to New Orleans since the storm?

No, I haven't been to New Orleans before or after the storm......so since I've never been there, I can't have an opinion?

You seem to forget that I am all for bulldozing the projects........my main reason for posting in this thread was to find out how they were going to build and mix middle class and poor......as both the article stated and Bush promised......which seems to have gotten lost in the partisan bickering.

[apdst]

No, I haven't been to New Orleans before or after the storm......so since I've never been there, I can't have an opinion?

Of course you can. I was curious as to whether your information was first hand, or came from the media. First hand info will show a much nicer picture than the media, I assure you. Things in New Orleans aren't as grim as some folks would have you believe.

[Mia]

A lot of people living in state housing are physically or mentally disabled. So 'get a job' isn't the answer.

Mia,

Obviously there are exceptions. I agree that there are folks that aren't physically, or mentally able to support themselves financially. The people I'm referring to are the ones that are able to work.


I don't know about other states, but in Texas you can't get housing if you simply don't work. If you're not disabled, or a pregnant mother, you don't get qualified.

Even disabled people wait forever on lists to get housing.

Do you have any stats on people who just don't want to work sitting around in government paid housing? And what states allow this and what criteria they use to grant the housing?

[AnnEsthesia]

I agree to some extent, Pookie.
The key to a livable wage is job experience.
Min wage jobs are not intended to support a family of four, but they are important to give youth incentive to get that experience...they are also nice for those who are on a fixed income or SSI and can only work so many hours without jeopardizing benefits.
If you are 22 or older and are only qualified to take a min wage job, who's fault is that? You should have spent less time effin around and more time acquiring skillz to pay the billz.
My niece is a single mom (dad killed in car accident), she has two kids, wants to work and is qualified, but if she makes too much, the State takes away her child care benefits, which far outweigh the extra $$ she would make. The way that the system is structured de-incentifies many people working. They throw up their hands and sit on the couch and watch Oprah...why not, it's easier than working? It's almost like the state doesn't want them to work, even when it's more expensive for them (us) when people don't.

An observation I have made over the years is that a lot of entry level positions in my field (service industry) are taken up by Mexicans, legal and illegal, and not by high school kids as they were in the past.
It makes good business sense from my position, but I worry where American youth are going to get their first leg-up in the world of working for a living.
Without experience or demonstrating that one is responsible enough to actually show up when scheduled and to follow direction...businesses are hesitant to welcome one into their fold with anything more than the minimum pay.


Very well said, pres. We need a system that supports the people trying to better their situation, rather than penalizing them. We need to have a way for them to still receive some of their benefits while they are working their way into a job where they can support themselves.

I have to say, we get a lot of calls from people just like your niece. People who want to better their situations but feel trapped because they cannot afford to lose their benefits. I mean, why would you work if it meant you would LOSE money?

[Mia]

To be self-sufficient. If you don't take the job that earns more and causes you to lose benefits, you can never rise up to the level that meets or exceeds income + benefits.

Why would one trap themselves that way?

[AnnEsthesia]

And yet, if you take that low wage job and you wind up starving because you cannot afford food after you pay your rent and utilities... why would you work? Self-sufficiency is great, but why would you work so you can make half as much as you can and not work?

You have to give people a reason to work and the ability to work and still keep a roof over their head, feed and clothe their family and afford medical care.

[apdst]

And yet, if you take that low wage job and you wind up starving because you cannot afford food after you pay your rent and utilities... why would you work?

The object, is to get a job--two jobs if need be--and work your way up. The good paying jobs go to the folks with the experience, talent and the education. That's just the way it is.

[Mia]

And yet, if you take that low wage job and you wind up starving because you cannot afford food after you pay your rent and utilities... why would you work? Self-sufficiency is great, but why would you work so you can make half as much as you can and not work?

You have to give people a reason to work and the ability to work and still keep a roof over their head, feed and clothe their family and afford medical care.


There is no such thing. Food Stamps are Federal, and if you have less than a certain amount per person in the household after rent and utilities, you get food stamps in an amount sufficient to feed everyone. They just don't take into account car payments or car insurance or anything else.

If your income is that low, you qualify for indigent health care as well.

A person who has an opportunity for a better job needs to take it, imo, even if there is a reduction in benefits to do so. Otherwise they have no hope of rising higher, and remain stuck forever.

If there were no benefits, what would they do? It may be a little less, but at least what they have then is THEIRS.

[lily]

And yet, if you take that low wage job and you wind up starving because you cannot afford food after you pay your rent and utilities... why would you work? Self-sufficiency is great, but why would you work so you can make half as much as you can and not work?

You have to give people a reason to work and the ability to work and still keep a roof over their head, feed and clothe their family and afford medical care.


There is no such thing. Food Stamps are Federal, and if you have less than a certain amount per person in the household after rent and utilities, you get food stamps in an amount sufficient to feed everyone. They just don't take into account car payments or car insurance or anything else.

If your income is that low, you qualify for indigent health care as well.

A person who has an opportunity for a better job needs to take it, imo, even if there is a reduction in benefits to do so. Otherwise they have no hope of rising higher, and remain stuck forever.

If there were no benefits, what would they do? It may be a little less, but at least what they have then is THEIRS.


When you speak of benefits, Mia.........are you talking about insurance........because that would break a family. Lots of people work at low paying jobs just for that benefit.

[apdst]

There is no such thing. Food Stamps are Federal, and if you have less than a certain amount per person in the household after rent and utilities, you get food stamps in an amount sufficient to feed everyone. They just don't take into account car payments or car insurance or anything else.

Anyone that has to apply for food stamps probably doesn't have any business oweing a car note every month.

[Elrathin]

Anyone that has to apply for food stamps probably doesn't have any business oweing a car note every month.


Cars are a necessity for some people in areas. Not everyone has access to public transportation nor is there even public transportation in areas. Make up your mind, do you want people working or not? To work some people need their cars to get there.

Sounds like they are damned if they do and damned if they don't in some conservative eyes. And therein lies the problem why many conservatives just are out of touch with reality.

[apdst]

Cars are a necessity for some people in areas

And there are plenty of $500 vehicles out there, too. There are also bicycles and motorsickles. A damn good motorsickle can be picked up for just a few hundred bucks.

Anyone who pays a car note, along with the insurance that goes along with that and STILL has to collect food stamps, needs some serious instruction in priortizing their lives.

Being poor is a decision.