Trump tries to win over ‘Suburban Housewives’ with repeal of anti-segregation housing rule

[Nepperhan]

This whole “Trump is a racist” thing is a fabrication invented by those who have made it their business to inflame racial tensions in this country. It’s a miserable thing to do.

It is clear that Trump uses racial invective. Or do you think that pro wrestling is strictly competitive?

 

[Ridgerunner]

“President Trump vowed on Wednesday to protect suburbanites from low-income housing being built in their neighborhoods, making an appeal to white suburban voters by trying to stir up racist fears about affordable housing and the people who live there.”

Are you trying to say that only people of color who require subsidies to pay their rent are detrimental to neighborhoods? But then, it’s consistent with supporting Joe Biden who said poor children can be just as smart as white children.

, the president’s new push to generate a racial panic in The Suburbs

Amazing! . . . Others . . . allow and encourage rioters to burn down cities, assault people, and keep cops from searching people from weapons and Trump is causing racial panic? From what I have seen, most of the rioters are white. But whatever. People in the suburbs can’t go downtown anymore and have to worry about the rioters coming to them like that couple in St. Louis, but the Dem party wants to bring low income people to live with them, cheek to jowl.

Maybe suburban housewives will vote against Trump, but the Dems seem to be doing everythign in their power to lose them. It’s not racism Trump is appealing to, it’s removing class warfare from their doorsteps.

 

[Nepperhan]

Are you trying to say that only people of color who require subsidies to pay their rent are detrimental to neighborhoods?

No, I’m saying that Trump was pretty baldly playing the race card in an effort to gain votes from racial fears. You dance around the edges.

 

[Ridgerunner]

No, I’m saying that he was pretty baldly playing the race card in an effort to gain votes from racial fears.

Not what you said. You pulled a Biden by implying that only non-whites require subsidized housing.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

They’ve lied about Russia collusion. They’ve lied about Ukraine.

Actually, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report just came out today in which it said that Russia did interfere in the election, and that Paul Manafort was in contact with a Russian intelligence agent during the transition. Also, it is Trump that lied about Ukraine, blaming them for the interference. The report says that the notion of Ukraine involvement in our election meddling was invented by the Russians and spread as their propaganda. It is not just me or some leftists making this up. It is in the bipartisan Senate Intelligence report.

 

[StudentMI]

Wasn’t it intelligence reports that told us Iraq had WMDs?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I think it is, though. “Affordable housing” means government subsidized housing as a practical matter.

No it doesn’t. If developers don’t want to follow the rules, they don’t have to build in that city. They know how to build affordable housing. They can still make money doing it, although not quite as much. But it does not take any government subsidies.

 

[Ridgerunner]

“Affordable housing” is a term of art anymore, meaning “subsidized housing”. New non-subsidized housing in a suburban neighborhood is not “affordable” unless it’s subsidized.

 

[StudentMI]

No it doesn’t. If developers don’t want to follow the rules, they don’t have to build in that city. They know how to build affordable housing. They can still make money doing it, although not quite as much. But it does not take any government subsidies.

Unfortunately I think Ridgerunner is correct here. Not because I don’t like him but just saying it’s unfortunate that government subsidies have to be brought in. However, they do.

What you’re talking about, Leaf, is subsidized housing by the government. If you force private contractors to build such housing it’s still a subsidy, only this time to other groups.

If you’re talking about private incentives to build affordable housing, then the issue becomes more complicated as virtually all housing is based on government subsidy either through land purchases, tax incentives or otherwise.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

“Affordable housing” is a term of art anymore, meaning “subsidized housing”. New non-subsidized housing in a suburban neighborhood is not “affordable” unless it’s subsidized.

Either government will pay the subsidy one way or another. If we cannot arrange of have affordable housing, we will have more and more homeless camps under freeways and in public parks. Dealing with that is a subsidy too which everyone pays in terms of a decreased quality of life, in addition to the added strain on charities to house and feed the homeless. (It is very hard to get a job when you are homeless.) So unless we want a permanent underclass of Dickensian proportions, we would do well to plan for housing for all people in places where there are good jobs and public services.

 

[StudentMI]

If we cannot arrange of have affordable housing, we will have more and more homeless camps under freeways and in public parks.

That is a misconception of market mechanisms. When the market was at its most free we actually saw the reverse of what you are claiming.

 

[JonNC]

Here we go again! You think Oval Faubus was in Chicago looting recently?

No. I think “Orval Faubus” is in the Seattle city council that just forced out a black female police chief.
I think he is on the Chicago government allowing law abiding American blacks be murdered by the dozen on the streets.
He’s the one who said they need to have space in Baltimore
He’s in the Portland government that allows rioters to threaten homeowners that the must give up their homes because of their immutable characteristics.

Even Republicans have characterized some Trump remarks as racist. You could say the label is controversial but it clearly is not false or uncharitable.

It is both. Interesting that the only time Democrats listen to a Republican is when they bash Trump.

 

[StudentMI]

Interesting that the only time Democrats listen to a Republican is when they bash Trump.

It’s to be expected.

 

[Nepperhan]

Interesting that the only time Democrats listen to a Republican is when they bash Trump.

Maybe it was the Republicans listening to the Democrats or both parties reading the writing on the wall – or the tweets.

 

[JonNC]

Maybe it was the Republicans listening to the Democrats or both parties reading the writing on the wall – or the tweets.

All my adult life I’ve listened to this lie that Republicans and conservatives are racist. Trump is no different.
Democrats snd progressives should look at the Orval Faubus‘s running and ruining our major cities for that last 50 years.

 

[Nepperhan]

All my adult life I’ve listened to this lie that Republicans and conservatives are racist. Trump is no different.

And all my life I’ve seen evidence of it. I’m old enough to remember Ike going after Faubus.

Do you know what the conservative position was as to de facto segregation? As to the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act or as to interracial marriage? I do.

 

[JonNC]

And all my life I’ve seen evidence of it. I’m old enough to remember Ike going after Faubus.

Yes. A Republican going after a Democrat. It is a shame many Republicans aren’t willing to do so now, have the courage of Ike. One even side with the Faubus Democrats of today.

 

[JonNC]

The remarks are “interpreted” as racist by people who are looking to see racism.

It’s been that way for decades.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

If we cannot arrange of have affordable housing, we will have more and more homeless camps under freeways and in public parks.

That is a misconception of market mechanisms. When the market was at its most free we actually saw the reverse of what you are claiming.

That is an example of mistaking a weak correlation with causation. The time you refer to when the market was most free was the 18th and 19th century. But that was also a time when land was plentiful and life was mostly agrarian. Also it was a time when wealth inequality was much less than it is today. So when there is little wealth inequality, there is less incentive to cater to the rich. One could make more money building a large number of houses for the middle class because there just were not enough comparatively super rich to build just for them. But today we have a much more wealth concentrated at the top end. So a developer can make much more money building for just them. Therefore the connection that you propose was due to other factors that had nothing to do with the lack of regulation. Regulation works.

 

[billsherman]

My guess is that it’s subsidized housing suburbanites will fear most. Secondarily, any kind of multifamily that isn’t well spaced and visually separated from the single family housing.

The best part of CAF is that it constantly reminds me that Jesus never really intended for us to love our neighbor as ourselves if it is inconvenient, or it would lower our property values, or it introduces poorly spaced out multifamily affordable housing to the suburbs.

Clearly Jesus was just trolling people who take his words seriously.

"Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You something to drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? When did we see You sick or in prison and visit You?’

And the King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of Mine, you did for Me.’

Then He will say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave Me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave Me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, I was naked and you did not clothe Me, I was sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’"