Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 12/09/2010 12:38:50 PM PST by Bulldawg Fan
CHICAGO (Dec. 9) -- The ungainly 15-story high-rise pierces the blue winter sky, a lonely emblem marking the end of an era in this city's public housing program.
Lights flicker on the 11th floor. Only one apartment is occupied -- and not for long.
Annie Ricks and five of her children (the youngest is 13) are packing their basketball trophies, framed photographs and TV sets -- a life in Chicago's most notorious project -- into a U-Haul today. They are leaving the Cabrini-Green high-rise to its fate, a demolition planned for early 2011, which closes a contentious chapter in Chicago history.
(Excerpt) Read more at aolnews.com ...
Proof that the left wants to create a permanent underclass that will never work and that keeps begging for more free handouts that YOU AND I PAY FOR!
That is the prevailing theory behind Chicago's decade-old Plan for Transformation, a project to demolish the worst of the city's public housing and replace it with a smattering of units in new mixed-income developments."
Oh, yeah. Bring the crime from the low-income neighborhoods to inflict on middle-income families. That philosophy is working out wonderfully well near D.C. Now nowhere is safe.
The comments after the article run about twenty to one AGAINST Li’l Orphan Annie the Deadbeat Welfare Baby Machine.
This lady has a state job and still lives in public housing. What am I missing?
If we HAVE to have a welfare state, I’d like to see a system were, if these projects were to continue existing, everyone would get into a bus every day, voluntarily, that would take them to a guaranteed job. It would not be hard work, but they would be required to work. They would then be bussed home, where they would be given CASH CREDIT for that day’s work. That is, a card that would “contain” their cash but could not be used without them showing ID (to prevent theft). The kids would be put in on-site daycare while they were away. Only the kids of parents that went to work would be allowed in the daycare.
If you choose not to work on a given day (or at all) you would not have to, but you would have to pay rent. And if you could not afford it, you would be kicked out.
I could go on, but you get the gist. Mainly, I’m just a strong proponent of a simple rule the government could abide by: Never give an individual money for NOTHING. That’s all.
It says she’s a “state-employed nanny.”
The state hires nannies? For whom?
I’ll bet most of the occupants have moved to Section 8 housing out in the burbs. Wonderful.
Where is the father of your children, and what support is HE giving?
Every time we had crime on our property, it was due to the punks in the projects nearby.
The good news? The cops caught every single perp.
The bad news? The welfare queens that bore the first group of kids are working on their second generation; so are the young chicks from the projects who act like alley cats. Having a child to them is like getting an “A” on a mid-term.
Meanwhile, our mayor, who is a successful black businessman, says he just can’t understand wehre the crime comes from in our neighborhood.
It would help if they ceased naming their kids “Deonte” and “Jamika” and “Davonna”. That immediately cordorns them off from decent and hard working society.
Ugh.
Cabrini Green: another socialist triumph.
TV sets? Let me guess, they bought two 13 inch black and white TVs for $5 each from Goodwill.
I wonder when Florida and J.J. moved out?
Riiiiggggghhht. We've had more of these Section 8 dirtbags run out of our neighborhood than I can remember.
I don’t think you meant to send that to me. I strongly agree with your sentiments. ;)
Sorry, no offense was meant by directing my reply towards you.
I posted this comment awhile ago. Ignore if you've already seen it. But, it's relevant to what you've said....
My Mom worked for DHS. She carried a caseload of 4-600 recipients (don't ask what welfare programs, I dunno). She estimated that somewhere between one in 3 or 4 of her long-term (more than a few weeks) clients was actually "needy". The rest were gaming the system, able to work but not willing to make the changes needed, double-dipping (working AND collecting benefits...that was the most common) etc etc etc.
Granted, she's very conservative and a hardass to boot, so they may have given her a lion's share of the hardcases.
She *really* used to like to run into her clients at various shops and stores....where they'd be working. "And when were you going to talk about this regular paycheck?", was her favorite question.
She finally got tired of the bureaucracy. Gov't provided no incentive to clean things up, so Administration had no incentive, and that rolled downhill into the workforce. She quit and took a less stressful job.
Hi, Rex. Yes, I’m in Montgomery County, not far from you. You know what the situation is here: the law requires that any developer who puts up a subdivision with more than 65 units must include some low-income housing. My own doctors-and-lawyers community backs up to housing containing dealers, sex offenders, addicts, and other low-lifes. The young professionals who buy townhouses nearby find themselves living next door to the transplanted ghetto residents. Even the nice families among the low-income sometimes have kin who visit them from DC and decide to take advantage of the prosperity they see nearby. So as a woman alone I have to have an alarm system, security lights, a dog, and a bunch of guns.
The idea that putting low-income families next to middle- and upper-income families will somehow motivate and inspire the lower-income folks has not worked out; it just inspires resentment and hatred rather than making the low-income folks say, “If I work hard in school I can get an advanced degree and have a house like that too.” It does not help. I don’t know what the solution is but this isn’t it.
I have to point out that some of the low-income families are really nice people any normal person would like to have as a friend or neighbor. Some of my son’s schoolmates and friends are among them. But they didn’t need to be “inspired” by proximity to middle-income people—their own internal values provided them with determination and an excellent work ethic. They’re not any happier about the presence of the scum than we are.
The state hires nannies? For whom?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if she's paid to watch her own kids.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.