Open Left

HUD is Trying to Privatize and Mortgage Off All of America’s Public Housing (David Kaib)

George Lakoff with more depressing news. HUD is seeking to privatize all public housing. Of course, this is just one more step in the process (read this in tandem with The Big Hurt's QH on SS privatization.)

The banks and developers make a fortune, with the taxpayers paying for it. The public loses its public housing property. The impoverished tenants lose their apartments, or have their rents go way up if they are forced into the private market. Homelessness increases. Government gets smaller. The banks and developers win. It is a Bank Bonanza! The poor and the public lose.
And a precedent is set. The government can privatize any public property: Schools, libraries, national parks, federal buildings - just as has begun to happen in California, where the right-wing governor has started to auction off state property and has even suggested selling off the Supreme Court building.
The rich will get richer, the poor and public get poorer. And the very idea of the public good withers.
This is central to the conservative dream, in which there is no public good - only private goods. And it is a nightmare for democracy.

We can laugh at Rand Paul all we want, but Democrats are dismantling our government, replacing the public good with private interest. Unlike Paul, they know to do it below the radar.

I don't care who is responsible, this must be completely exposed and

stopped. The process of exposing and removing Republicans from decision making in the government, whether from Bush era appointments, or conservadems masquerading as Democrats.

There is NOTHING in this policy, nothing in this set of priorities, nothing in this set of policies that IN ANY WAY represent Democratic Party policy, discussions or convention. I say the people doing this need to be stopped. Its party, I am sick of people going against party principle, written, discussed or passed at convention somewhere.

Fire the Bastards.

by: HousesofProgress @ Sat May 22, 2010 at 08:30:33 AM CDT

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

re: responsible

The process of exposing and removing Republicans from decision making in the government, whether from Bush era appointments, or conservadems masquerading as Democrats.

do you happen to know who appointed the HUD secretary?

by: The Big Hurt @ Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:41:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That these policies are pursued by elected and appointed Democrats

makes me consider whether or not these are actually consistent with "party principles".

I am sick of people going against party principle

Could it be that folks like you have little to do with determining the principles of the Democratic Party?

"It sounds wrong...
...but its right."

by: SpitBall @ Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:03:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

at this point what can you call it but blind pursuit of ideology

it doesn't even make sense in terms of their own interests or the logic with which privatization is argued for.

If you have certain sectors that are not profitable
(e.g. providing catastrophic health care, providing benefits to the unemployed or public education in difficult environments, maintaining libraries, etc.) then on what planet would you believe that instill a profit motive in those businesses is a good idea? It makes zero sense not only politically and economically, but just on basic reasoning, as far as I can tell.

Of course, if you take into account that the government believes the debt/deficit is the biggest crisis, but refuses to raise taxes on the people able to afford to pay them, is cutting deficits in the middle of a recession rather than providing stimulus, then policies like these start to look like a natural, if infuriating outcome. How else are they going to raise the revenue to pay off the loans they took to pay for wars, social security, and goldman sachs - there is only cutting spending and selling off state assets. and in the meantime, it's the most vulnerable in society that will continue to suffer, and suffer even more.

c.p. chandrasekhar has a very good article on this basic issue in mrzine and why it is important to remember that public debt and private debt are not the same thing - public debt is owned by a government which has the ability to raise taxes to generate more revenue. this is a crucial difference which can, at least, mitigate some of these issues.

Of course, they could just end one or both wars and that might solve their deficit problem, if they really are hell bent on cutting public spending - or is that not what they meant by cutting public spending? ;)

by: dr anonymous @ Sat May 22, 2010 at 08:36:02 AM CDT

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

all public housing? holy shit!