Interesting piece in The Grauniad today - doubtless this has been discussed to death here, but I thought I'd post it:




The rent is too damn high.

That's what I was thinking when the five guys jumped me as I was walking down a street in Brooklyn at two in the morning. At least, that's probably what I was thinking, since that's what I'm thinking most of the time.

I didn't see them, obviously. I don't have Spidey sense; I don't have peripheral vision. I'm a 10th degree black belt in karate, but, in the real world, there is no "crouching tiger". There's a car, exhaust steaming out like dragon's breath. I was pushed through an open door.

They tied my hands, blindfolded me. One said, "This is what you get when you talk about what you don't understand," or words to that effect. I could figure sending guys after me if I hadn't paid the rent – some of those landlords are straight-up criminals, it wouldn't surprise me – but I had. They wanted me to simply stop talking about it.

And they meant business, taking me to a wooded area off the parkway. I kept hoping this was some sort of prank. That my blindfold would come off and I'd be staring into a TV camera, into the face of Joe Francis or Paris Hilton.

I won't lie. Despite my three years as a helicopter door gunner in Vietnam, I was frightened. In Vietnam, I could see in the dark, shadows and voices guiding me through the jungle. Here, I could see nothing.

But I could smell gasoline.

They poured it over my head.

What did I say that had gotten them so mad?

George Bush and Barack Obama spent $700bn bailing out the banks, after the banks' housing Ponzi scheme collapsed. Obama spent another $787bn on the so-called "stimulus package". Every man, woman and child in America paid $5,000 to rescue Barack Obama and John McCain's top-hat-and-monocle-wearing friends. And the unemployment rate is still 9.6%. You still can't pay your mortgage or rent.

If the banks had collapsed, every homeowner who needed to could have called the bank and said, "I'm going to only pay you what I can afford, and you'll have to take it because you're too weak to say no." The free market would have solved the housing crisis. Obama and McCain only wanted the free market to apply to the little man, not their rich banker friends.

Banks have seized thousands of homes. What can we do?

First, reverse each and every foreclosure where bankers filed false documents. Arrest those bankers, right now. Filing false documents in court is illegal. Treat the banks like any other racketeering organisation that schemes to make millions by breaking the law. Bring the paddywagon, and give all these homes back to the families.

Second, nationalise the banks. If they say they are "too big to fail", and hate the free market when it applies to them, then make them a government organisation. Cut the average top banker salary from $20m a year to $45,000 a year. Bankers do not deserve big money. The free market has spoken: their businesses collapsed.

Third, use eminent domain to seize all of the other thousands of foreclosed properties that blight the urban landscape, and transfer them to families needing homes. The supreme court of the United States says that eminent domain can be used to transfer land from one private owner to another in order to further economic development (Kelo v. City of New London).

Finally, if we believe the free market theory, that putting cash into people's hands is the best way to boost the economy, then how about a rent freeze? High rent is the cancer and low rent the cure to this economic crisis. The rolling back of rent would give people money they can spend.

Grandmothers can't afford their medication; or, if they can afford it, they can't eat. You work 40 hours a week and you give all your money to the landlord. You've got no money for clothes. You've got no money to go on vacation. Even if you live in a homeless shelter, you have to pay $350 a month for rent.

When police found me that night, tied to a tree, at about 4am, I had some choice words for them.

The rent is still too damn high.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/27/jimmy-mcmillan-the-rent-is-too-damn-high

I agree with a lot of what he said here, especially regarding the free market. Using eminent domain to take dormant properties off the market and provide them to families who need it is a good idea too. If the Banks don't like it they can shut the fuck up if they took Tarp money. Banks aren't doing dick with these properties and they are just going to waste sitting empty.

But nationalising the banks doesn't do a damn thing but take the money and control out of one group of rich people and send it to another.

We need to do a better job as people not putting our money and faith in these TBTF banks.

Why is it that everytime there are assholes who try to legalize crime and isolate themselves from the free market the answer is "nationalization"?

Really? Nationalization. So you're rather have One or a small group of shitheads deciding the fate of us all huh. Ok. Yeah that's historically worked out. Politicians are no better people than corporate figures that people hate so much. They have the best interest of the people who prop them up in power in mind...and that's about the end of it

The answer is REGULATION and somehow always ensuring that competition exists. Unfortunately I guess it's just built into the financial business that the more money you make the more fucking corrupt you become and the more you try to buy out the competition and ruin the free market.

This guy is absolutely insane. He was on the Lebatard show a couple weeks ago. It was 15 minutes of pure gold. Dude is an absolute madman. It's hilarious.

Nope.

The dude was on the ballot.

If the property is on the market then nope. The city or rehabilitation organization (habitat for humanity or the like) is more than welcome to purchase it in that case. Not buying the property even if it's in arrears while hoping to acquire it thru eminent domain seems opportunistic, and not in a good way.

If the property is abandoned, is in arrears of it's tax liability, and is costing the local government for it's upkeep, then yes, let's be progressive about things.

If the property resided outside of a major metropolitan area or suburb of such (ie. in the boonies), then it could be a different situation altogether.

This is amazing. It's like an internet meme come to real life. "rent is 2 damn high"

whats with the same names appearing as multiple parties?

Trickery.

lol@ Rent too damn high being higher than libertarian

Those parties simply endorsed the candidates of other parties instead of fielding their own.

I don't even belong to New York's Libertarian Party.

Thats so stupid. If they dont field they're own.. then their party shouldn't appear on the ballot. Endorsements have no place on a ballot like that.

Skitch, a lot of people just want to wear the "I voted" sticker so they take a stab at the ballot without knowing what or who the hell they're voting for.

There's a benefit in having your name on a ballot in more than one place in that regard. Multiple guess, ftw.

oh, i get why the candidates do it. Its as obvious as switching doors.
But the states shouldn't allow it.

it's called fusion voting. it enables people to register their support for a third party without 'throwing their vote away' since the candidate gets the vote regardless

Working Families is a pretty liberal party in NY and they put mostly democratic candidates on their line, except for one local position where EVERY party (working families, republican, libertarian, conservative, independence) had this one guy and the democrats had the other. I wish I remember the guy the democrats had. I wonder what he's indicted for.

Thats terrible.

why do you say that? I think it's a great idea.

Because its downright unnatural for a third party to get more than 5 percent of the vote.