February 28, 2007 • 4:35 pm
Suburbs: Large areas of land zoned for single use and low density buildings.
1: Destruction of the Environment
This happens on many levels. First being that the American farm is destroyed, and natural open spaces are destroyed. Then on the second level is the destruction of forests for wood to build houses. On the third level is pollution, because you must drive further distances to go to work, or even visit a resturant.
In a traditional city buildings are built upward saving farm space, which will run out if sprawl conitues. In European countries land is tigthly managed to prevent this. High and medium rise buildings are created from resources such as brick or steal, while these have environmental impacts when created, it is far less worst then deforestation. Obvious to anyone it is easier for a person to use mass transit or walk in a city.
2: The Future Slums
The white middle class is reclaiming the cities. Areas once occupied by whites in the inner suburbs are increasing home to people of diverse ethnicities. Some of these areas even experience crime on the same levels as cities. As the cities poor move out they can expect a four thousand dollar windfall. Why? Because the cost of owning a car is at a minimum four thousand a year.
3: Destroyed Farmland
Just like gentrification is viewed negatively, the thought of farms being destroyed should be repulsive. America still has plenty of farmland, but America can no longer feed the entire world alone. Besides the impact of wasted farmland, it is unfortunate for Americas hardest workers to find their land stolen, and ultimately wasted.
The reason I focus on the future is because continued investment in the suburbs is a top threat to America. The buildings that have been built, should be kept, to allow for those who want a three hour commute, to have the freedom to live where they want. The end of World War II marked one of Americas most prosperous times, and I hope we’ve not wasted our money by investing in a failed urban design.
Filed under: Environment, The City and Suburbs
February 28, 2007 • 12:10 pm
“I’m sorry, we can’t cash this check without two valid forms of photo ID.” I here this two many times at a bank, and my blood pressure rises each time I here it. I don’t have any “valid” photo ID. I’m homeschooled, and thus don’t have student ID. State ID requires you register for the
draft selective service, which at 16 and in the middle of the Vietnam Iraqi war isn’t a wise choice.
In the name of protecting America from terrorists using our banks, the government has really just forced males to register for the draft to participate in modern society.
Now here are some ways a terrorist can use our modern bank system, without needing to ID himself. You can’t buy a plane ticket with cash, so you can be tracked. Easy solution, go to the grocery store, buy a $500 prepaid visa card, and register it with a fake address. This prepaid cards don’t require any sort of indenity, so I’m sure they’re used for all sorts of criminal pursuits.
Filed under: American Politics
February 27, 2007 • 9:24 am
Dick Cheney was over in Afghanistan when the base he was at was bombed. Fourteen died in the blast, but Cheney was safe. I hope this causes Cheney to realize (in a personal, self agonizing, suicidal type way) that his actions have resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Filed under: Uncategorized
February 24, 2007 • 7:18 pm
The state of Virginia passed a resolution (I’m getting tired of these… thinking about the Iraq one right now) saying they express “Profound regret,” for slavery. Among those who voted yes, was the man who said “Blacks should just get over slavery.”
The resolution also expressed regret for “The exploitation of Native Americans.” At first I was angered by the fact that it was only an apology. Then I realized, one, it would be hard to prove who where slaves in Virgina. But then it also issued an apology to the Native Americans, they easily could have included a provision to repay them for the stolen land, murders, and sometimes slavery. Unlike American blacks, Native Americans generally know what tribe they came from.
And at very least they could have taken down the Statues that line Richmond roads of Confederate heros who claimed the lives of both blacks and Native Americans. But they only issued an apology. I, as a black man, don’t view it as an apology because there where no actions to prove it.
Filed under: Black Matters, History, Local Politics
February 24, 2007 • 8:56 am
Fox news has found these “dirty secrets” from Obama, but from a conservative view what is wrong with them?
1: He smokes.
Most congressman do smoke, in fact Nancy Pelosi banned smoking near the house floor, and many lawmakers where ticked by that. Bush also received 60 million dollars in donations from tobacco companies for his 2000 presidential run.
2: Barack Obama does nothing for African-Americans.
Why should this be a problem? Conservatives want to get rid of “special interest” groups anyways.
3: Connections to Islam.
Some have concerns about Obomas middle name, Hussien, and his Muslim father. Isn’t Bush a person who rubs his Christainity in everyones face? So whats wrong a “covert” to Christianity becoming president?
Filed under: '08 Election, American Politics, Religion
February 23, 2007 • 8:42 pm
I had a good laugh over at John Edwards site, it said “Add a banner of us to spruce up your MySpace profile.” I understand not using the word “pimp”, but spruce? It could have at least said “spice.” I better buy the domain, spruceyourprofile.com.
Then I was over at Obama’s website and they had the Creative Commons logo on the site. You know the little circle. But it didn’t link to anything, and didn’t note what license it was under. I went to the terms of service page, and that didn’t specify what CC license the content was under either. I hope the site deisngers know that Creative Commons is about copyright, and not just creativity. At least John Edwards site told us what CC license his content was under.
Filed under: '08 Election, American Politics, Technology
February 23, 2007 • 1:24 pm
A California lawmaker dropped her push to make spanking illegal, and instead seeks to limit certain types of discipline.
From personal experience I can say spanking is good. My mother disciplined both me and my sister with a belt, and in latter years with a ruler. Sometimes it would cross the line, like when a ruler split in a half. But in our teen years me and my sister obey our mother (and authority) more than most young people.
One time my mother had her friend at a historical black church, and her white friend asked “Why are the children so well behaved?” The service was one of those three hour events. The reason is because African-Americans are more likely to discipline their children. This follows historical reasons, if a black child where to steal a candy bar from a store, the entire black community in the town might suffer. So disobeying parents was possibly a matter of life and death.
Another time an anti physical discipline parent complained to the Children Protective Services about us being spanked. CPS investigated, and found nothing wrong. But what if they had found it to be abuse? I’d probably be in a foster-care system dealing with who knows what.
Unfortunately African-Americans – inparticular – are moving away from this, and the result is having an obvious impact on African-Americans, and the entire community. If California where to ban spanking, lets just say the state would have many more problems with crime, drugs, unwanted pregnancies, and a generally dysfunctional society.
The lawmaker has now reached a compromise and will ban certain types of spanking, such as using a belt, or a switch. But my dad was displined with an electrial cord, so clearly this bill is still a failure in preventing abuse.
Filed under: American Politics, Religion
February 22, 2007 • 8:10 pm
February 22, 2007 • 12:00 pm
Starting from personal experience I’d say no. My parents “officially” divorced after six years. My dad has had one girlfreind for six years, and they’re still going strong.
The average American marriage lasts for eight years. The average serious (marriage like) homosexual relationship lasts seven years.
So why is a piece of paper nessacary? If you choose to live with someone for life, why must you apply for a certificate? According to the Christain Bible (which western law is based on), a person becomes “one flesh” after sex. This one flesh can be viewed as a marriage. If you stay with that person for life, than why can’t govement, society, and religion recognize it as a marriage?
Filed under: American Politics, Religion
February 20, 2007 • 9:37 pm
Photo by Amir.
Filed under: Media