Black activitists and politicians force Trader Joe's grocery out:
 

Claim it would attract too many whites.


http://benswann.com/black-activitist...o-many-whites/

Liberal leaders oppressing poor constituents to perpetuate the liberal agenda. This is how career liberal politicians stay in office. There are no jobs, so vote for the guy that gives you handouts. Give a man a good job, he starts voting conservative. It's only color on the surface; oppression and hardship are both color blind.

I wonder what MLK would think of the current state of the "civil rights" movement?

It's community driven, just like all construction there are pubic meetings... Along with everything else for that matter... It's just like the city of Beavercreek not wanting public bus stops in the city because of the demographic of people they don't want allowed access - we all know what that means. On the surface it seems as though it would be great for the commun, and should be... There are underlying reasons. Regardless, it can be subliminally racist because of how the media conveys it, but on most accounts there is usually more involved.

Seems Kinda dumb though. I wonder what they are leaving out.

I typically ask the same question. In this case, there doesn't seem to be an "other" side to story.


http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...ood-desert.htm


http://www.ibtimes.com/trader-joes-p...cation-1553231

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...an_lead_2.html


I keep hearing the word "gentrification" tossed around as though it's a profanity or a conspiracy, and this puzzles me. Gentrification, by definition, is an increase in the economic viability of a neighborhood. So to stand up and publicly decry someone for attempting to gentrify a neighborhood is to literally say "we want this neighborhood to remain poor."

Yes, I'm going to go with my it's kinda dumb quote again... I don't get the whole gentrification bit. They could just use common English and say "we think poor people won't shop there," or "we don't think it fits our community demographic," which is a poor defense, mainly because last time I checked Trader Joe's isn't all high profile, or a strip club... It's a grocery store. They have deals as well as expensive whole food items. Meh.

I'd say let them build. If it's a hit it's a hit. If it's not - yay vacant building that can be bought by deveroes.

Prospering neighborhoods don't need "community organizers."

I got the same thing: We don't want to improve the community, we want to keep it poor.

In fact, it's been my experience that TJ's typically has lower prices on mast "baseline" grocery items (milk, cereal, flour, cheese, ground beef, etc) than many other grocery stores, which I attribute at least in part to the fact that the vast majority of their merchandise is "store-brand," and yet typically of higher quality than equivalent "name-brand" items from competing supermarkets.

And there's no question at all that TJs is cheaper than the various 7-11s and whatnot which, at present, constitute the only source of groceries within convenient walking distance of the proposed location, which is in a mostly residential, suburban neighborhood.


Besides, TJ's accepts food stamps.






Yeah, but just think- if the neighborhood does suddenly take off, then the community organizers can instead become HOA and condo-board presidents. Much more lucrative gig, with more opportunities for graft.




Yeah, I just don't get it...

I read the entire letter, you can find a copy of it here. (Also, understand that this wasn't JUST a Trader Joe's, it was an eleven-unit retail plaza, of which TJ was the anchor store.) A few comments:






Basically, this is what I hear:


Poor people: Why is nobody creating jobs for us?

Rich people: Here, we are now going to create some jobs.

Poor people: Why are you trying to oppress us?

Rich people: Huh? Fuck this shit, I'm gonna go build another dozen Starbucks on the good side of town.

Poor people: Hooray! We sure showed whitey a thing or two!







Anyway... In case anyone was wondering, this is what a plate of stir-fried duck tongues looks like:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1392057363

It's amazing the sort of things that you learn while doing research for seemingly unrelated posts...

Mmmmmm . . . . Duck tongues!

It is really disturbing how that movement (and our president) thinks. They truly believe what they write. It makes it impossible to communicate, as if there are alternate universes. There is no common basis of understanding.

Sigh.

I'll attracts whites.

I find it rather telling that almost all DIY type forums seem to be completely devoid of liberals. Something about the personal responsibility and work ethic required for DIY work I suspect. Perhaps there's a DIFM (do it for me) forum where all the liberals hang out.

So you're talking about subaru forums?

Wow . . . just wow.

It's Time to Let Felons Vote, Holder Says - NBC News

You see, this is where my brain starts to hurt.

I consider myself to be a liberal. The last time I checked, this meant that I am fundamentally in favor of individual liberties, limited government, a laissez-faire economic policy, etc.

Where things start to get all bendy is when I realize that, in 21st century America, these are precisely the ideals claimed by the so-called "Conservative" party in OPPOSITION to the so-called "Liberal" party, despite the fact that the former seem hell-bent on legislating morality while the latter would appear, at least superficially, to be sympathetic to many of the underlying tenets of a socio-economic philosophy which lies somewhere between Marxism and State Socialism.


In other words, we seem to literally be living in bizarro-world, at least insofar as bicameral electoral politics are concerned.


And this confuses me greatly.

Joe you should sent that letter with your take to the guys that wrote it and see if they completely ignore your logic as seems to be SOP for groups like that.

I read about this and couldnt understand it. Who do these people think that this store was going to hire?

I cant imagine how anyone in that area could sit back and let these fools talk for them and advocate for running off new business. It seems backwards to me.

Way I see it, there are more of us in the middle than there are on the left or right. And if we all just put our heads together we can totally make it all right. Its just getting people convinced that the toeing the party line isnt getting them anywhere, and that those people are actually the fringe of each party who are out to take us all for a ride. Like him or not, we could have a Gary Johnson or a Ron Paul for president and really go in a different direction for once instead of just talking about it or bickering about abortion and gay marriage while they run away with the country.

I suppose when I say liberals, I mean liberals in the current democratic affiliated sense. Socialists basically. It's ironic that they are called this as liberals aren't much in favor of liberty. I favor a mix of conservatism and libertarianism. It's always hard making sensor of the labels and the fluid nature of said labels. The attempted purpose of my comment was to point out that the sort of people who identify with the current liberal definition are not likely to be seen on a DIY forum because of their warped and ridiculous world view in which people somehow deserve more than they earn or work for. This could seriously turn into a rant, so I'll stop there.

I'd settle for an honest human being of any sort. If any libretarian got enough steam, I'd vote for em. Penn Jillette should run for president I think.

Jimmy Carter, no matter what else you might say about him, was honest. Honest to the core. But DC ate him alive.

Don't know what the answer is. I do think that the primary system tends to give the fringes in all directions more power than they deserve.

Exactly my point.

I tend to take a very literal interpretation of language. I am very careful in the way that I use words, and I tend not to intuitively remember that speech is often distorted by the political process.



Would people please stop not ranting in my threads? Seriously, rant away!

It's now called *classical liberalism*.

The socialists hijacked the term "liberal" from the now-known-as-classical-liberals aka libertarians (of which there are variants from constitutionalists to Anarcho Capitalists.

You're confused because progressive-democrats stole the term in order to confuse. Everything on the left is pretty much based on false pretenses.

In my dream world, the 28th Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits candidates for any popularly-elected Federal office from openly declaring themselves to be aligned with any political party or religious sect, and prohibits the organizing of political parties for the purpose of endorsing or representing candidates for said office.

(It also requires that, prior to registration, prospective voters submit to an examination similar to the Naturalization Test which is required of all foreign nationals applying for US Citizenship.)

My dream world may result from only 2 laws:

- All taxes payable by check on April 15 (no withholding tax)
- All elections on April 16

Haha.

You know, I really like that idea. And yet it was just this past week that someone over in the taxation thread really jumped on me and accused me of being willfully ignorant (or something like that) for saying "I don't understand why people are happy about tax refunds- I'd far rather owe my whole tax burden in April."

I suspect that there are enough people who don't understand how income tax works that such an idea would never fly, though not for the reasons that you & I might consider intuitively obvious.

"What do you mean you want to take away my tax refund?!?"

lol!

I, too, would laugh if the notion did not depress me so.

All new laws would be implemented on April 17th.

I'd rather substitute the income tax with a national sales tax. I hate the time and efficiency lost to filling tax returns. I hate how the tax code is a playground for politicians returning favors. I hate that dishonest people can so easily evade taxes. I hate . . . .

I'm a hater.

or eliminate taxes altogether and give everyone free access to the fed. reserve to spend money at will.

Yep, this is what I would love to see:

FairTax.org Home Page - Americans For Fair Taxation

It will never happen though. It removes the power of Congress/IRS to punish/reward *insert X group* through the tax code.

And, of course, a certain percentage of the population will believe that a flat sales tax is inherently regressive, and that, furthermore, regressive taxation is inherently either unfair, or more unfair than progressive taxation.