PDA

View Full Version : Bulldoze cities? Social Engineering?



stsinner
06-13-2009, 01:18 PM
I don't really know what to make of this story.. I heard about it in the run up to the election, but the reason I was read was more of a tin-foil hat crackpot theory that Obama wants to force people to live in smaller, more crowded areas because it's easier for population control should martial law ever be declared due to his Socialist policies.. While I'm not really on board with that, Obama has put in place some policies and said some things that I never thought any American President would say or do.

What I don't get about this story is why they want to bulldoze cities that are no longer inhabited at capacity. Where is all this refuse going to go? They even say that the city of Flint, MI is buying up houses in more affluent neighborhoods to offer to people who live in houses they want to bulldoze.. Why would you want to bulldoze someone's house when they live in it?

And they say the land will be, "Returned to nature.." This is disconcerting because of all of the crackpots that are trying to enact cap and trade legislation on us and increase all sorts of taxes to combat the farce that is global warming when it's 65 degrees on June 13 at 1 in the afternoon... Will people ever be allowed to build on these reclaimed "green areas," when the economy recovers, or will it be considered property of Mother Earth and essential to environmental health?

They also say that people will be able to enjoy living next to a forest or a meadow once nature reclaims the land, but not if they have to live on top of each other.. I enjoy living in the country where I don't have to interact with other people if I don't desire, not living in a crowded city where the government has decided it would be best for me to live..

Just too many unanswered questions and unusual desires in this thinking for my taste. Flint may be a city in decline because of the decline of the auto industry, as pointed out in the article, but they say they want to do this across America.. A little too progressive for my taste. I'm all for tearing down houses that are obviously dilapidated and uninhabitable or dangerous, but to identify entire neighborhoods with occupants among the dilapidated houses for destruction seems like a very bad idea.


Bulldoze Shrinking Cities (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5516536/US-cities-may-have-to-be-bulldozed-in-order-to-survive.html)

Nubs
06-13-2009, 07:51 PM
Here is another way to think of it:

Democratic control is directly proportional to population density.

Tax income is directly proportional to population density while tax outlay (government services - fire police etc..) is inversely proportional to population density.

Right up Nobama's alley

Sonnabend
06-13-2009, 08:07 PM
that Obama wants to force people to live in smaller, more crowded areas because it's easier for population control should martial law ever be declared due to his Socialist policies..

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_g7KcbMxmLEU/R5E2Yk_YZ4I/AAAAAAAADFY/_m0pJ7oocXI/s400/TinfoilHat.jpg

bflavin
06-14-2009, 01:57 AM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_g7KcbMxmLEU/R5E2Yk_YZ4I/AAAAAAAADFY/_m0pJ7oocXI/s400/TinfoilHat.jpg

Have to give props to the cat in this pic. Great expression.

megimoo
06-14-2009, 02:07 AM
Have to give props to the cat in this pic. Great expression.The cat expression is saying, please save me from this raging butt plug !

linda22003
06-14-2009, 12:53 PM
Have to give props to the cat in this pic. Great expression.

When I saw that on "I Can Has Cheezburger" the caption was great: "2 of us look stupid. 1 of us is."

PoliCon
06-14-2009, 12:58 PM
Here is another way to think of it:

Democratic control is directly proportional to population density.

Tax income is directly proportional to population density while tax outlay (government services - fire police etc..) is inversely proportional to population density.

Right up Nobama's alley

And lets not forget that the democrats economic and social policies only serve to drive out the productive while at the same time - they attract the unproductive.