The New Black Panthers

I think we all need to stop and realize that it's wealthy white people's fault that low income neighborhoods are festering shit holes.

Personally, I can't wait until I'm making real money so I can go drive some minority family's property value down. All the cool white people do it. It's a rave.

Originally posted by -m-3000
I think we all need to stop and realize that it's wealthy white people's fault that low income neighborhoods are festering shit holes.

Personally, I can't wait until I'm making real money so I can go drive some minority family's property value down. All the cool white people do it. It's a rave.

You stopped far too short in dishing out blame me thinks

Originally posted by xiannaix
Your argument is one of the cost of labor hours vs police protection of the public and property (public and private)?

LA riots - huge event - huge damage. Lets say these guy did 1% of the damage of the LA riots.... of .5% of the damage. Was the cost of the police an economic benefit when compared to the damage that did not happen as a result? (the question comes down to the cost of harm prevention - what's it worth to you)

THERE WERE 10 PEOPLE WHO COULDN'T EVEN FOLLOW BASIC MILITARY PROCEDURE FOR SPACING THEMSELVES OUT AT ARM'S LENGTH!

The fucking camera men for the news could have taken them out with their tripods.

[Mustafa]

I remember when the New Black Panther Party of Self-Defense emerged here in Dallas from the breakdown of the Black Panther Militia (under Aaron Michaels). They were sloppy then, and it appears not much has changed since Khallid Abdul Muhammad's freaky death in 2001.

It should also be properly noted that many of the surviving leadership (Bobby Seale and David Hilliard) of the original Black Panther Party have criticized the "New" Party, to which Malik Shabazz, Khallid Abdul Muhammad's successor, responded, "our position is the Panther exclusively belongs to no one. It belongs to the people." To which he added, "(they) are really working with the Zionists. I think their lawyer is one. I think they are being used by outside forces to keep alive the counterintelligence program of the F.B.I. and the U.S. government, creating divisions and factions among black organizations."

And so it goes.

[KiloWatts]

If I'm correct, these guys are the same guys that got up every morning at 6am and protested in front of the DPD Headquarters last year, waking my ass up.

Only about 10-15 of them in every case.

Now they've simply bought some new clothes, berets, and a big flag.

NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!

Originally posted by hyoomen
THERE WERE 10 PEOPLE WHO COULDN'T EVEN FOLLOW BASIC MILITARY PROCEDURE FOR SPACING THEMSELVES OUT AT ARM'S LENGTH!

The fucking camera men for the news could have taken them out with their tripods.

the ten - they were the cops or the protesters?

My point..... "the ounce of prevention..."

[Adam D]

Originally posted by -m-3000
I think we all need to stop and realize that it's wealthy white people's fault that low income neighborhoods are festering shit holes.

Personally, I can't wait until I'm making real money so I can go drive some minority family's property value down. All the cool white people do it. It's a rave.

That's not what I'm talking about.

It's more a money thing than anything else. My argument is simply that the wealthy neighborhoods are just as self-serving as every other neighborhood, the difference between them and the poor neighborhoods is the wealthy neighborhoods have the money to influence City Hall, the poor neighborhoods don't. They have the money to attract attention from politicians and they have the money to win political offices. That's not just Dallas, that's true to politics period. Money talks.

My argument was simply looking at the way in which the city divides services. I don't think you can drive down Preston or the other streets in north Dallas and say they are just as full of potholes, cracks, and general shittiness the way they are in many other parts of town. I can't recall having ever seen a pothole around north Dallas, but there might be a few. Same with the quality of the schools. Look at the way crime problems are dealt with, as well. Deep Ellum was allowed to swarm with crime before the city did anything. But a handful of people were mugged on Lower Greenville, and the mayor and the police were right on the problem. The response clearly wasn't the same.

The city simply pays more attention and more urgency in dealing with problems when it comes from wealthier neighborhoods where political contributions and votes are most likely to come from.

Is that sort of patronage system fair? I don't think so. I would contend that if everybody is paying taxes into the city government, everybody deserves to benefit equally from it.

Originally posted by Adam D
That's not what I'm talking about.

It's more a money thing than anything else. My argument is simply that the wealthy neighborhoods are just as self-serving as every other neighborhood, the difference between them and the poor neighborhoods is the wealthy neighborhoods have the money to influence City Hall, the poor neighborhoods don't. They have the money to attract attention from politicians and they have the money to win political offices. That's not just Dallas, that's true to politics period. Money talks.

My argument was simply looking at the way in which the city divides services. I don't think you can drive down Preston or the other streets in north Dallas and say they are just as full of potholes, cracks, and general shittiness the way they are in many other parts of town. I can't recall having ever seen a pothole around north Dallas, but there might be a few. Same with the quality of the schools. Look at the way crime problems are dealt with, as well. Deep Ellum was allowed to swarm with crime before the city did anything. But a handful of people were mugged on Lower Greenville, and the mayor and the police were right on the problem. The response clearly wasn't the same.

The city simply pays more attention and more urgency in dealing with problems when it comes from wealthier neighborhoods where political contributions and votes are most likely to come from.

Is that sort of patronage system fair? I don't think so. I would contend that if everybody is paying taxes into the city government, everybody deserves to benefit equally from it.

The wealthier neighborhoods pay much, much higher property taxes. So much that they use some of the taxes to fund municipal repairs in the lower income neighborhoods.

So who again is getting the preferential treatment?

Destroy your own neighborhood, demand that the wealthy pick up the slack and fix your streets because you don't have your shit together enough to do it yourselves, and then blame the wealthy for your problems.

Fucking bullshit.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!

Originally posted by -m-3000
The wealthier neighborhoods pay much, much higher property taxes. So much that they use some of the taxes to fund municipal repairs in the lower income neighborhoods.

So who again is getting the preferential treatment?

Destroy your own neighborhood, demand that the wealthy pick up the slack and fix your streets because you don't have your shit together enough to do it yourselves, and then blame the wealthy for your problems.

Fucking bullshit.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!

Renters pay no property tax (directly.)

Poorer neighborhoods receive a disproportionately higher amount of tax revenues in subsidies, emergency services (911), and other forms of government benevolence when compared to the contribution received from those properties.

Originally posted by xiannaix
Poorer neighborhoods receive a disproportionately higher amount of tax revenues in subsidies, emergency services (911), and other forms of government benevolence when compared to the contribution received from those properties.

Think crime rate might have any bearing on those numbers?

Hmmmm.....

Originally posted by -m-3000
Think crime rate might have any bearing on those numbers?

Hmmmm.....

that's only one element to the emergency services comment - but no less important

[Adam D]

Originally posted by -m-3000
The wealthier neighborhoods pay much, much higher property taxes. So much that they use some of the taxes to fund municipal repairs in the lower income neighborhoods.

So who again is getting the preferential treatment?

Is that your assertion, or can you factually prove that?

Even if you could factually prove that, I don't think that constitutes preferential treatment. City revenue is for the benefit of the entire city, not on how much you put in. Maybe you disagree with that, but that's the way the system is supposed to work. If you do, feel free to work to change that.

Perhaps it speaks of a larger problem.

Regardless, it makes complete sense to try to improve the quality of the entire city, even if that means tax revenues are being redirected in city services to areas that are more needing. As the overall quality improves, crime does go down and the overall property value of all of the city improves. That's factually proven in several studies. It's beneficial to everybody. There's a reason why half of downtown is empty and why there's a lot of crime in Dallas, and a lot of it centers on the economic disparity both in general and in the way the city allocates services. You want to do away with those, set the standard for the entire city higher than it is.

Destroy your own neighborhood, demand that the wealthy pick up the slack and fix your streets because you don't have your shit together enough to do it yourselves, and then blame the wealthy for your problems.

Fucking bullshit.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!

It's not about blaming other neighborhoods for those problems. It's the city government playing favorites to keep politicians in office. How is it the responsibility of the citizens of particular neighborhoods to maintain the streets? Do wealthy neighborhoods fill their own potholes and renovate their own schools? Somehow I doubt that.

I could understand if people were out with jackhammers on the street, but they aren't. It's simply a matter of the streets being older in some neighborhoods and when streets suffer wear and it's the city's responsibility to maintain public land such as the streets. Streets in older neighborhoods and poorer neighboyhoods rarely are renovated the way they are in wealthier areas. All you have to do is look at them. Or look at the schools. Do students deserve better educational resources because of their parents' income? I don't think so. But that's what happens.