“...you and Tony were the only people who wanted this parkland to be used for housing” (not “parking”, as I wrote in error).
“Working together, we can create a model for how a progressive city addresses the systemic problems of urban America.”
You know something, Kevin? I don’t want to come across as impolite, but I don’t know how else to sincerely express my feelings. Those feelings are as follows: you and your fellow “progressives” can stuff yourselves with all your feel-good propaganda.
It’s the only thing you can do with a tad of dignity, since you will never admit the past and upcoming (easy to predict) failures of your disastrous leftist policies. What’s amazing to me is that years ago, you yourself lived for a few years in an Eastern European country that was decimated by those policies; millions of people’s lives affected in a very negative way – I know it ‘cause it was the same country where I was born and raised – and you learned absolutely nothing.
The problems of “urban America” are the direct consequence of the Democratic Party rule in those cities. Practically all American cities that have big social problems have been ruled by democrats for decades. Those cities are their playground where they can do whatever they want (since they managed to populate and gerrymander most urban districts and precincts in ways that ensure they have no political competition – just like in Boston).
Progressivism – the currently fashionable political cult that has found a hospitable home in the Democratic Party -- is just doubling-up on all those failed policies (while it also antagonizes sensible moderate democrats who in large numbers have been changing their party affiliation to unenrolled).
But as long the illiberal academia (no longer intellectually independent as it used to be) brainwashes young people, who then turn out in droves to vote for “progressives” – democrats don’t care that the party is bleeding reasonable, fair-minded, color-blind (as MLK fought for), knowledgeable and experienced people. As a result, Blue America is becoming simple-minded, and dangerously totalitarian and oppressive – which every intelligent person can see with their own eyes, be it on TV, in the papers, or in their own lives. But nobody talks about it around here – because it’s a one-party state (by design), so what can you do? (Well, I’m going to try to do something anyway, and others should too.)
You seem to think you know what everyone in Boston and our neighborhood wants. “Progressives”, of course. No, not everybody – not even a majority, I suspect. The voter turnout in the mayoral election was low. Most people didn’t see much of a difference between Wu and Essaibi-George – they were both saying the same politically correct things. So a majority of registered voters didn’t bother to vote. The choice wasn’t so exciting for them.
I believe that most people who are committed to Boston and have skin in the game, so to speak, want to live in a city that is demographically and economically balanced, mostly centrist, living within its means, respecting its history and the unique character of its neighborhoods, and equally welcoming to all classes of people – not only to those of certain races and backgrounds (those that the democratic party machine keeps expanding and funding, so in exchange, they can continue to have monopolistic control in city politics – which then overwhelms centrist, moderate and conservative voices at election time).
And what’s funny is that at the same time, you guys like talking with a straight face about your support for “diversity”. But it’s only the kind of diversity that benefits certain people, while it harms others. You would never tell people in Chinatown they don’t have a right to their neighborhood, with its strong ethnic flavor -- but in every deed and action, you’re showing that people in Allston-Brighton do not have a right to their neighborhood (you only want to ensure that your neck of the woods will stay relatively safe – but you forget that once you unleash a a wave, you can’t stop it).
The bottom line is that a “progressive” city is a prescription for a disaster – like Baltimore, like Detroit, like big parts of Chicago, Philadelphia, and major cities in California and Washington state, which are “progressively” (of course) squeezing the middle class out -- because they refuse to provide the quality of life that middle class Americans need and deserve for themselves and their children. The “progressives” can’t help but rob Paul to pay Peter (as long as Peter votes blue).
Do you really believe that people want to live in a “progressive” city where everyone and their brother can show up in droves, and they are automatically entitled to everything – while the citizens who have invested all they have in their homes, and whose parents and grandparents built those cities, cannot count even on basic zoning protections – plus they are constantly being told how they can or cannot live? No car for you!
And how can you talk about addressing homelessness when you are OK with the current democratic party policy (brought about by “progressives”, of course) of open borders – and therefore an uncontrolled population growth, mostly by people without marketable skills, whose every need has to be satisfied with taxpayers’ funds (or in the case of housing, by inducing developers to build inappropriately huge, dense buildings without any open space - something you know about very well, because your daughter, as an aide for development matters for Councilor Breadon, is championing/calling for on a daily basis.
From what I know, under Pres. Biden, by the end of this year, 2 million people will have crossed (i.e., were allowed to cross) the Southern border illegally (and they’re not just from South/Central America, but also from Africa and the Middle East). Just divide that number by 50 states for easy counting – that’s about 40,000 new residents for which each state, roughly, who will need housing, just after one year of the open border policies – but this will be happening year after year under Biden.
Those people will also need healthcare, schools, the judicial system, public safety, eldercare – you name it. “Progressives” like talking about “sustainability” – but this is totally unsustainable, and yet, they’re fine with it. Clearly, a giant case of collective cognitive dissonance.
Sometimes I just feel like there is nothing to do but weep for Allston-Brighton (Boston too – its charm and character disappearing, not to mention the country) – because people like you now have disproportionate power, and you are going to accelerate the trends that make Boston neighborhoods transient, mediocre, and otherwise inhospitable to long-term middle-class residents (and America inhospitable to its own citizens).
Honestly, if you guys want to turn A-B into something like the Bronx, with canyons of oppressive buildings, and no greenery that people can see from their windows – then why not just move to the Bronx? Why make us into the Bronx?
Please do not deny that this is not what you want. Actions speak louder than words. When we in the neighborhood stood up against sacrificing the DCR land on Leo Birmingham Pkwy (where the bocce courts are) for housing – people wanted it to remain parkland – you and Tony were the only people who wanted this parkland to be used for parking. You only gave up when you realized nobody agreed with you.
And that’s how I suspect most people feel about some other “progressive” ideas. Depending on how aggressively those things are going to be pushed on us, some of us may have to rise again – just like we did when we saved the DCR parkland against your wishes.
With the inauguration of Michell Wu, we are experiencing an historic moment in Boston history and a moment of political opportunity.
Working with Boston residents and enjoying an electoral mandate, Mayor Wu has an opportunity to transform her progressive vision for Boston into a reality. Remarkably, Mayor Wu received more votes than any previous candidate for Mayor. She won a decisive victory in Allston-Brighton winning every precinct in our community.
I respect Annissa Essaibi-George, supporting her in every City Council election and endorsing her positions on the Boston Public Schools and on ways to address Boston’s homeless crisis.
Therefore, I hope all Allston-Brighton residents, Wu supporters and those who voted for Essaibi-George, support the Wu administration in creating more affordable housing, enacting sweeping changes at the Boston Planning and Development Agency so that Boston becomes a model for effective urban planning that serves the interests of its people not powerful institutions and developers, enhancing public transportation, enacting a Green New Deal, significantly improving the Boston Public Schools, addressing Boston’s homeless crisis, and reforming the Boston Police Department.
We should seize this moment of political opportunity by creating a more equitable, inclusive, and just city. Working together, we can create a model for how a progressive city addresses the systemic problems of urban America.
Kevin M. Carragee
To post to this group, send email to AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/AllstonBrighton2006?hl=en
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AllstonBrighton2006" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to allstonbrighton...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/allstonbrighton2006/BN8PR10MB3700C1DAA9A846EF8B9FD4D0A19B9%40BN8PR10MB3700.namprd10.prod.outlook.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cleveland Circle Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cleveland-circle-co...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cleveland-circle-community/DBCE27BB-92AA-4961-B2F4-F1A3A7D97929%40comcast.net.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/allstonbrighton2006/48253D90-5230-4FFB-AA5A-FB94C9FD3418%40comcast.net.
Eva, FDR was attacked for promising a plan for social insurance and a year or so later signed his Social Security Bill into law in the mid 1930s. At the time he was accused of being a socialist. A similar thing happened with Lyndon Johnson signing the Medicare bill in the mid 1960s, again accused of being a socialist. Yet, today both Republicans and Democrats alike benefit from these measures and don't refer to them as being socialist.
Let's not forget that we need to consider those less fortunate than ourselves.
Myrtle – you have your strong beliefs, so I doubt I can make you understand this issue on a deeper level, and therefore change your mind. But maybe others will benefit. I’ll try to make it short.
Both SS & Medicare were/are designed to ensure that older Americans and legal immigrants (as a manageable percentage of the US population that the country can handle) are taken care of – and that’s perfectly fine and necessary in a civilized society. So is free quality education; nobody questions that. College education should be useful (no BS subjects that you cannot make a living with) and also affordable.
Affordable universal healthcare is also needed. But since poor people cannot afford much at all, so healthcare, which is very expensive to administer, has to be effectively free for them. Meaning – somebody else pays.
Here is the rub: None of those good things are possible to have or sustain in the long run if the numbers of people who receive those costly entitlements are growing rapidly and exponentially thanks to uncontrolled, excessive immigration. Those who want America to have a decent, reliable, and secure safety net should be greatly concerned with the skyrocketing numbers of people, as percentage of our population (and not just immigrants, and not just elderly) who rely on government funds for survival.
You can only sustain those benefits when the numbers of needy people are low in proportion to the numbers of productive/high-achieving folks (taxpayers in higher tax brackets) and other working/self-sufficient people. It’s a numbers game. The more needy people is not better. The more needy people means building a house of cards.
Responsible, thinking immigrants understand that. Those who form their opinions just on the basis of their immigrant identity, do not. They are being more loyal to their immigrant identity than to America, the country that took them in. It’s sad. Makes you think of the saying “No good deed goes unpunished”.
Those who are in charge of the Democratic Party don’t care about such details and a wide range of negative (though predicable) consequences down the road. They are single-mindedly fixated on ensuring their permanent control of the country via manipulating our demographics. They’ve figured out that people who feel insecure will always vote for democrats. So they are willing to create that insecurity in any way it takes, for those cynical reasons.
And that is the reason why they are ignoring our immigration laws -- unfortunately with the support of clueless bleeding hearts in our society, who don’t understand the what they’re pushing for will make us into a 3rd world country. And our President is ignoring our immigration laws. How can anyone support him in that and feel good about it?
The link and chart below is from 6 years ago, and predicted exactly what is happening now. Please note the numbers of immigrants, as percentage of the population, in the 1930s and 1960s when Social Security and Medicare, respectively, were enacted. And then note what it is now.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/allstonbrighton2006/CAAFBETJooHj159jeLghz4CS7o%3D%2BWSYiRStz2LZT9CSnu54h%2B%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com.