Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama’s Plan for Ohio : Making suburban taxpayers prop up failing Democratic cities
National Review ^ | 10/08/2012 | Stanley Kurtz

Posted on 10/08/2012 6:54:05 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 10/08/2012 6:54:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All


Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


2 posted on 10/08/2012 7:01:24 AM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Where I live, the city has been charging an occupation tax to people who live in the suburbs, but work in the city. There have been efforts to permit the city schools to absorb some suburban school districts, but so far, that hasn’t gone over well.

None of this is new, and yes, it’s a scam for the suburbanites.


3 posted on 10/08/2012 7:04:22 AM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

Yep Obama really hates those rich white folks in the suburbs..the man makes me sick!


4 posted on 10/08/2012 7:08:37 AM PDT by Michigander222
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Kurtz is correct, but he is intellectually dishonest. The word
“white” does not appear in his article, except as in “White House”. Kurtz knows darn well that a primary aim of “redistributing” from suburbs to cities is to redistribute from whites to blacks and Hispanics. By phrasing it as “suburbs vs. cities” he is trying to avoid charges of racism and race-baiting, but everyone knows what he is talking about, so he might as well own up. I guess Kurtz doesn’t want to end up like Derbyshire.


5 posted on 10/08/2012 7:14:57 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: musicman

SSDD - Democrats are ALWAYS looking for someone else’s money to carry them. People have been fleeing big cities for years to avoid being robbed by the freeloading left. Now, the left wants to come out to their homes and rob them anyway.

Screw Cleveland - they made their overpriced political bed, now let them sleep in it.


6 posted on 10/08/2012 7:17:36 AM PDT by meyer (It's 1860 all over again - the taxpayer is the new "N" word)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Aren’t they already doing that?

I mean, Columbus has gone out and annexed all of Franklin County and then some.


7 posted on 10/08/2012 7:21:21 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

Sooner or later, all those nice, BIG, surburban foreclosures, which are now fannie/freddie/GOVERNMENT owned will become the new housing projects of the 21st century.

I have NO DOUBT this will happen. I truly believe it has been the end-game plan all along, way back when those bad housing loans originated.

Every single neighborhood will be flooded with low-lifes.
EXCEPT neighborhoods of members of congress and potus.

This is another part of the redistribution plan.


8 posted on 10/08/2012 7:23:00 AM PDT by a real Sheila (RYAN/romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
B0mma Ph0nes are only free to his peeps!

Everybody else PAYS!

9 posted on 10/08/2012 7:26:29 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a real Sheila

Where I live we have something called the Saunders Decree. Some black plaintiffs about 15 yrs. ago sued claiming that the Section 8 housing that was available to them was in majority black areas, and hence, RAAAACIST.

So the County entered a Consent Decree under which they must actively move as many of these tenants as possible into more posh (white) suburban neighborhoods. They have actually been buying up houses with OUR TAX MONEY to do so.


10 posted on 10/08/2012 7:31:57 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
I mean, Columbus has gone out and annexed all of Franklin County and then some.

Columbus had the advantage of being able to blackmail unincorporated areas of the county with denial of water service if they didn't allow themselves to be "annexed". I believe that has pretty much come to an end in Ohio with their more recent annexation laws.

Unfortunately, Tennessee (where I now reside) still hasn't learned the lessons of the overemphasis on annexing. Chattanooga, under RINO Mayor Littlefield, has been trying to go on an annexing rempage, gobbling up hunks of unincorporated Hamilton County for quite a while now. The state needs some new annexation laws badly to keep the greedy cities from gobbling up more land and forcing people to pay double and triple their present property tax rates for NO INCREASE IN SERVICES!

11 posted on 10/08/2012 7:34:41 AM PDT by meyer (It's 1860 all over again - the taxpayer is the new "N" word)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The liberal ‘green energy’ policy has nothing to do with energy, but rather limiting the public ability to live outside of urban city centers.

When energy sources are restricted and very expensive people are forced to live close to public transportation and in ‘planned’ communities.

That way the productive can once again be taxed to support the nonproductive takers.

12 posted on 10/08/2012 7:48:17 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

a few years back, Rochester, NY mayor ran for Monroe County (which surrounds/contains Rochester) executive touting’Metro-Goevrnment, where the rich whitefolk in the burbs would have to subsidize the city. He was wupped. He lost 4-1 in some of the suburbs.


13 posted on 10/08/2012 8:00:36 AM PDT by wny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: a real Sheila
I live in a working class neighborhood. We have a lot of big old houses that no single family wants. They are too big to maintain and the utilities are too expensive. So most are now Section 8. Many have been subdivided into apartments. So you could have maybe 20 people living in these houses.

These homes were beautiful at one time. Now they look like crap. One
of them had a fire a few years ago. The fire actually improved the appearance of the house. Nearly all of them have broken windows and doors. I guess if someone else is paying for your home, you don't care.

The idea was to get low income people out of the slums and into better neighborhoods. But many of these people have turned these neighborhoods into the slums they once lived in.

14 posted on 10/08/2012 8:04:05 AM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I don’t see much to be concerned about other than the claim that Obama is going to do this. Federal Tax dollars are Federal Tax dollars. They always go to where Congress wants and the President gets what Congress gives him.

There has never been any expectation that just because your region produced x amount of Federal Tax Revenue that your region then gets x amount back in projects and programs.

City tax isn’t new either. New York’s been doing it for decades as far as I know.

Now I do get concerned about co-opting revenue from unincorporated suburbs, but don’t care about incorporated suburbs.

Usagi’s law of Lucrativity: The more lucrative your earnings, the more palm you see.

I’ve known Vegas Cocktail waitresses that earn over $500 a night but when all said and done, they only take home 1/3 of that.


15 posted on 10/08/2012 8:04:14 AM PDT by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Excellent. And the redistribution we see now is just a
bridge to what he really wants which is reparations. One
big check someday.


16 posted on 10/08/2012 8:05:15 AM PDT by americas.best.days...
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I would love to see Romney run an ad highlighting the “benefit” that cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Oakland, and Chicago have gotten from 50+ years of liberal Democrat rule.

Imagine an ad called “Thank You.”

Open with shots of burned out buildings, homeless camps, soup kitchen lines, and union protests in the above mentioned cities.

Voiceover: “In this busy campaign season, we would like to take a moment to say a well-deserved ‘Thank You’ to the liberals who have been running these fine cities for the last 50 years.

Thank you for 20% unemployment... (photos of Detroit)

Thank you for a teacher’s union that cares more about its own perks than about giving our children a chance at a bright future. (photos of angry Chicago teachers)

Thank you for block after block of abandoned buildings that now serve as havens for drug dealers and derelicts.

Thank you for turning once proud American manufacturing cities into national laughingstocks (photos of cleveland)

Keep up the great work! Here’s to another 50 years of liberal rule!


17 posted on 10/08/2012 8:07:05 AM PDT by vonkayel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
I mean, Columbus has gone out and annexed all of Franklin County and then some.

Columbus is the exception. Cincinnati, Dayton and Cleveland are all surrounded by suburbs. I don't know about Akron, Canton, Youngstown or Toledo.

Dayton was notorious for annexing any businesses in nearby unincorporated areas because the entire township had no say - only the city and the people living in the area being annexed. The last couple townships finally incorporated to end that.

Where I live, the city has been charging an occupation tax to people who live in the suburbs, but work in the city.

Ohio is the opposite. Where you work gets the first cut and where you live usually gives you a credit for taxes paid where you work - but a few cities have started to limit that credit so you can pay for both. Currently I pay 1.5% where I work and an extra 0.75% (2.25% city rate - 1.5% credit) where I live. Fortunately my city credits the full amount paid elsewhere so I don't have to pay even more.

18 posted on 10/08/2012 8:26:53 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (Big Bird is a brood parasite: laid in our nest 43 years ago and we are still feeding him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: musicman

No, the real plan is to force people out of their suburbs back into the cities. This is the UN Agenda 21 in action.


19 posted on 10/08/2012 8:50:18 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Exactly. Everyone is going to live right on top of each other is some squalid, multicultural morass with Big Brother feeding and housing everyone. Scenes straight out of Blade Runner.


20 posted on 10/08/2012 8:57:09 AM PDT by Molon Labbie (Prep. Now. Live Healthy, take your Shooting Iron daily.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson