Archive for December, 2005

Box of Strawberry Yogurt Burst Cheerios

Saturday, December 10th, 2005

Yogurt_os1Yesterday I ate an entire box of Strawberry Yogurt Burst Cheerios in two sitting. Until my last such post, I’ve never done something like this before. 
Am I eating more or are these boxes getting smaller?

Gentrification is the battle-cry of leaders who have failed their people

Friday, December 9th, 2005

When I first moved to my house near Howard University, locals would stop and stare at me, people wouldn’t sit next to me on the bus, and a couple "brave" souls called me "white boy", "opportunist", and one person even threw something at me.

What had I done?

Generally, the thought was that I had invaded a neighborhood and my presence was interfering and unbalancing it. Crying "reverse racism" is obvious, but there must be something deeper.  Did my fixing up my house and improving my property interfere with a way of life (as more than one person told me that it did)? What balance did I upset by getting the city to prevent dumped trash from accumulating the alley, to board up a vacant home, and to get barrels of dangerous chemicals removed out from a vacant lot? The accusations couldn’t have been consensus since I befriended the Section 8 family two doors down – all three generations of them including: the out-of-work father, his continually pregnant daughter, her and her pot-smoking siblings and cousins, and all of the seven unwashed and malnourished children that lived there.

Someone said that my actions were causing old people on fixed income to lose their house. Let me get this right … previous leaders of the community desire crime and dilapidation in order to make sure that their senior citizens have a place to live? A common response to that has been that has been that my actions raise property taxes, which people on fixed incomes can’t pay. So if these senior citizens own their house, why don’t they get a reverse mortgage and live well on the new wealth their appreciating house has provided them? Well, one economist rebutted that this would not allow the house to be given to the owner’s offspring. But if the offspring are to get the house, why don’t the offspring pay the increasing property tax? It is a lot less expensive than paying a mortgage! In return I was told that the offspring may not have sufficient income to pay even this amount. Isn’t that the fault of the people and their previous leadership?

What am I not getting?
Please drop science on this nooblet.
Set me strait so that I may understand.