66 Comments:
terrible. public housing crowd just can't get it right with these photo opps.
There are so many unfortunate aspects of this whole deal.
Sharon Jasper has further crystallized the beliefs of many that the projects are filled with lazy people collecting their government checks and buying T.V.s instead of educating or feeding their children, a fact that I'm sure the Times-Pic was ready to capitalize on for eyeballs (just read the comments on their site).
The problem is that Sharon Jasper was most likely robbed of any hope of an education and therefore cannot articulate her true feelings, but must repeat what her local preacher or politician has told her her feelings should be - which unfortunately do not reflect what is captured in these pictures.
We then attach ourselves to the debate by taking what has now become 3rd hand information and trying to synthesize it into what jibes with our beliefs and preconceived notions.
At the end of the day, the argument is no longer about people, or houses, or living conditions, or dignity - it is about what side spun those best for their own political purpose.
Sharon Jasper is not the problem, she is a victim...she just doesn't know it, or doesn’t know why, or doesn’t know how.
The argument that these people should get out and work is not only valid, but should be a rallying cry for our New New Orleans...but how do you do it in such a way that it doesn't get politicized?
Nice to read so many of the NOLA blogs are doing the hard work of prejudging folks based on (1) their advocates and (2) what kind of TV they watch.
No, I don't think this woman could make a downpayment on a house with the $1800-$2400 (and that's new) TV she has. 'Course you don't know if that was a gift or she saved up for it by doing odd jobs -- you only care how it "looks."
It is to laugh. Our government is robbing taxpayers to the tune of over a trillion dollars on a war against a country who did not attack us. Our government has given billions of our tax dollars to corporations like Halliburton to make a profit off the suffering of folks in New Orleans.
And you're worried about how it will "look" for a woman to have a 60" television. Bayou St. John speaks of folks "getting out to work." How do any of you know she doesn't work, that many of these folks do in fact work?
Dangerblond has it right:
http://dangerblond.org/blog/?p=971
Same old misdirected anger that allowed this to be said:
****
“Lyndon Johnson ruined this country!”
“Really? How?”
“Listen. The day that a niggah on welfare could walk into the A&P and buy the same cut of beef that I buy with my hard-earned money, that’s the day this country was ruined!”
****
The advocates for the poor in NOLA aren't to your taste -- and this television "looks bad."
I've always admired the NOLA blogs -- but on this issue, both housing for the poor and dealing with poverty in general -- I think all too many of you have really missed the boat, and are playing right into the hands of those who are only too happy to profit from the suffering of others.
Agree agree agree with the above comment.
Will have more to say.. but it's going to be another big post.
Oh and I still haven't done the sports yet.
nightprowlkitty has been all over this debate from day 1
Sharon Jasper seems to have done alright through the housing voucher program.
Clearly the place she's living is not a slum, just as clearly she would not be better off living in a tent in Duncan Plaza.
By the way, people in the voucher program may be eligible for a utility allowance, which as far as I can tell for a 1 BR all electric apartment is about $90/month.
The biggest problem is that EVERY LITTLE DETAIL can be used against the folks who are working for change. The T-P might have asked Ms Jasper why she had the TV in there and chosen not to print her answer for a number of reasons, some of the biggest reasons being relevance to the story they wanted to tell, editing, and/or a consideration for column space. We have become so media savvy in this day and age that, while we are all for a reconsideration of public housing, and, more importantly, what will crop up in its place once it is demolished, we can also see the ways in which the words and images we amass for that reconsideration can just as easily be turned around to bite us in our collective butts.
This is a helluva lot bigger than quibbling over a 60" TV. This is about how to make an argument more effective. The T-P does make a note of the fact that Ms Jasper didn't want to bring the reporter and the photographer into her home. They chose not to elaborate on why she had a hard time paying her utilities (which might also be due to rising electric bills due to Entergy gouging everybody in general) or the fact that everything might be new because she lost everything around 8-29. We don't know. The paper is telling us what it thinks we ought to know. Problem is, judging by the comments on nola.com, many people are secure with being fed only so much. They are not challenged to think beyond those words and that picture...
...but reconsidering that picture in the context of all the other slanted stories the paper has printed on this issue leads us to think that that TV is gonna spin this story in such a way that it leads us all further down the pro-demo road.
I second that Leigh C. especially in the light of the fact that Louisiana is trying to land a major contract with the military for the cyberspace command center.....Louisiana needs to learn how to successfully pick it's own battles.....Shit we fight aabout everything down here in Louisiana to no avail!!!!
But on a light note--I saw Tab Benoit in concert....The beer was cold and Tab was sizzling.....:o)
Of the things in life that truly make me happy it definitely is Cajun men.....:o)
http://thehill.com/images/last_six/20071219.pdf
Lawmakers and officials from at least six
states are competing neck and neck over
the headquarters location of the Air
Force's nascent Cyberspace Command,
which promises thousands of jobs and
millions in revenue.
The Air Force, which has been tasked
with protecting cyberspace -- everything
from electricity grids and bank systems
to military computers and mobile communications
-- is expected to decide early
next year which base will be the home of
Cyber Command. The provisional headquarters
are currently at Barksdale Air
Force Base, La.
A lobbying war between several Air
Force towns has been intensifying in recent
weeks as communities and their
representatives make their case to the
Air Force leadership, and in the case of
newly elected Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal
(R), as high up as President Bush.
The entire California congressional delegation
sent a letter on Monday to Air
Force Secretary Michael Wynne urging
him to consider Beale Air Force Base in
Northern California as the home of the
new command. Beale already houses the
Air Force U-2 and Global Hawk spy
planes as well as a ground station that deciphers
and disseminates intelligence information.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
(R) is also lending his support.
In making their case, the Golden State
lawmakers pointed out that Northern
California's technology boom and universities
would provide the Air Force
"unmatched opportunities" for publicprivate
partnerships.
"Northern California is a recognized
leader in state-of-the-art technology,
cutting-edge innovation, and boasts a
highly qualified work force," said Sen. Dianne
Feinstein (D-Calif.) in a statement.
Sorry, I mis-attributed words by Spawnofjohn to Bayou St. John.
Sure, the media is going to spin this, our media has been dysfunctional for years now -- that's why the blogs came about, why citizen journalism came about.
There are powerful folks who wish to profit from the suffering of others, and they are all too happy to divide us over this kind of nonsense. They wish to distract us from the wholesale robbery of our national treasury -- "oh look! It's those undocumented workers that are screwing you out of jobs ... certainly NOT the fact that our labor laws have been shredded and big corporations like the present situation just fine!" "Oh, look! That poor woman has a big expensive TV! Do you want your tax dollars supporting this? Oh, and don't look at how we're robbing you blind with no-bid contracts and the machinery of war!"
The "beliefs of many" about the working poor are a result of this campaign, a campaign of pandering to our worst qualities of suspicion, jealousy and fear. This is nothing new.
What IS new is that we bloggers can expose this and continue to point to the real culprits here, and it ain't the poor.
Jeffrey, your T-P bullshit detector should be going "WHANG, WHANG, WHANG" right about now.
Oh trust me it has from the start of this foolishness.
it is remarkable that city council gets to vote up or down on this. hud's dangling hundreds of millions of dollars in funding as both the carrot and the stick here, but this isn't federal highway funding. it'll never come to this, but i wonder how the argument will change if the council votes no.
anyone else surprised midura is voting to go ahead with redevelopment?
How much power does Rent-A-Center have in this area?
Okay so I'm not the only jeffrey in the universe. But I'm still the only Yellow one that I'm aware of.
BS detector or not, the fact remains, IMHO, that we now deserve an answer to the question about why a big ass television is sitting in the living room of someone who's taking a little sliver of each of our paychecks, because when you multiply that by several thousand people in New Orleans alone, it becomes more than just a sliver. We want transparency from corporate welfare recipients. We shouldn't expect any different from social welfare recipients. The story was a big pile of steaming shite -- no doubt about it, because (as I said) the photo begs a question which wasn't answered. And what of the other stories I've heard in person about how public housing really was a step up to a better life. Even if it weren't there are many legitimate reasons for why people deserve our assistance, or should get it even if they don't deserve it. But now we deserve an answer about that damn television. I want my tax dollars to be used for people who really need it, because of course, but for the grace of God there go I, but ... but ... but ... we will never win this argument about the responsibility we have as citizens, and by extension, the responsibility our goverment has to us, as long as there's no answer for the questions being asked about that friggin' television set. Could someone have just asked her, politely, to explain what her situation was, and how that thing came into her possession? And then found someone else to put in the story? How could anyone not ask? All of it -- absolutely every bit of this discussion needs to be fair game, on an even playing field, with civility and respect for one another, with the goal of achieving dignity for all, and helping people achieve their full potential, and helping them to pursue their dreams. I think spawnofjohn captures that sentiment very poetically. All I'm doing is asking for information. What's the harm in that? This shouldn't be a conversation about which side you're on. We'll never solve the difficult challenges we face as a nation if we're not allowed to ask questions. We *can* solve this public housing controversy if we want to, with full opportunity for reasonable discussion -- which is only the first step toward solving in general the host of problems we face as citizens of a struggling city, as a nation reduced in stature, and as individuals. All it takes is a little honesty, admitting that we might be wrong at times, suspending our beliefs, listening, making difficult decisions, and arriving at consensus. A little leadership from relevant public officials would certainly go a long way toward helping in this endeavor.
Oh yeah, by the way, military contracts are welfare for Republicans, Sharon. LOL. Of course, Democrats and Republicans both like 'em because they provide jobs. War is the primary export of the United States, but the cost always comes back to us in multi-faceted ways. And again, where in the public sphere is it safe to say that, with any meaningful consequence to our public policy?
Interesting how vehemently we demand that this woman account for her television set but emit barely a peep in the direction of asking the current HUD secretary to account for his blatant cronyism.... which I'd say is a great deal more relevant to the current issue anyway. Not that the T-P is on that story... at all.
Nightprowlkitty:
I'm not prejudging Ms. Jasper, but I'm definitely judging "advocates of the poor" who would point to her as a victim of the change in housing policies.
Spawnofjohn is probly right that she is a victim in other ways-- I can't really say-- but, jeebus, her unit is not slummy. There must be dozens of real examples of displaced public housing residents currently living hand-to-mouth in unacceptable conditions with unresponsive slumlords.
And Ms. Jasper and (her daughter?) is what the "activists" come up with? A woman who tells City Hall that she might be better off living in a tent than a decent apartment with a leaky faucet and a bum door?
Right. After Christmas, I want to see a notarized LIST of every gift received by a public housing resident. They shouldn't be giving any gifts themselves. If they can afford to give gifts, they can just buy themselves a house. I also want an inventory of any jewelry in their possession. No woman who wears a diamond engagement ring needs help paying her rent. And while we're at it, let's have a look at those grocery lists. I don't want those people buying anything but fresh fruit, vegetables and milk with my tax money! Poor people should have to prove that they are worthy, and if they are not worthy or can't prove it they can just go to hell.
Forget Jeffrey's BS detector, where's his ultra-sensitive Backlash sensor?
In Pitt's pink houses?
And forget the TV, too, unless you're criticizing the T-P story.
I gave my girlfriend a tinfoil ring.
Oyster you're right. The TV is causing a "backlash" a particularly ugly one.
And to answer the other Jeffrey's query about Midura: she's supporting "redevelopment" because, among other reasons, this is a politically radioactive issue, and she wants to serve more than one term on the CC.
Some of the protestors called for an investigation of Jackson at the HCDRC meeting. Scout has been on that trail for a bit.
Right but none of the local media... or other such commenters seem to give a flip there.
They would much rather ensure that no one on a fixed income owns a bigger TV than I do.
And, according to Editor B, Midura supports the redevelopment of Lindy Boggs Hospital as well.
http://b.rox.com/2007/12/04/whos-stonewalling-who/
Schroeder, "transparency" in social welfare as in "corporate welfare"? I can't believe you would conflate the two.
There is a world of difference between looking at the books of a corporation that has enjoyed billions of dollars of crony contracts and asking a woman why she has a big TV. You know something? I don't care at all why she has a big TV. Nor do I think you are going in the right direction by extending that to "how many OTHER of these folks have big TVs?"
Frankly, your whole line of reasoning reminds me all to much of Reagan's use of a single welfare mother who had a Cadillac -- and the result was slashed programs for the poor and the biggest incidence of homelessness I've seen in my lifetime.
I don't think your argument has any merit at all. I am absolutely not in favor of humiliating human beings on public assistance by making them account for every detail of their lives. We ALL benefit from tax dollars -- from roads to schools to hospitals. I also have no doubt many of these folks do work and they all pay taxes. So unless you're willing to also undergo the humiliation of being asked why you buy and wear and do by some public official, I don't see why folks on public assistance should undergo that humiliation.
I guess next you'll be wanting to bring back the sumptuary laws -- only folks who make $300,000 a year or more can wear the color purple. Guess that would mess up Mardi Gras, though, so better pick another color.
Oyster, you say:
"Spawnofjohn is probly right that she is a victim in other ways-- I can't really say-- but, jeebus, her unit is not slummy. There must be dozens of real examples of displaced public housing residents currently living hand-to-mouth in unacceptable conditions with unresponsive slumlords.
And Ms. Jasper and (her daughter?) is what the "activists" come up with? A woman who tells City Hall that she might be better off living in a tent than a decent apartment with a leaky faucet and a bum door?"
I don't look at Sharon Jasper as a victim, but as a human being. It's possible her new place isn't what she was used to before the Federal Flood, it's possible she's suffering, along with most others in the region, from PSTD, and if we need to see "shabby" dwellings, all we have to do is google "FEMA trailers" and "formaldehyde." There's no lack of examples.
The T-P is not where I'll turn to understand this story, that's for sure. I think Dangerblond nails it in her last several posts, as well as e at We Could Be Famous.
The way we treat the most vulnerable in our society says everything about who we are as human beings. It also gives us a clue as to how close we are to being next in line, especially under the social policies we've all suffered from in this past seven years.
There are folks who wish to profit off all this, and they are going to do everything they can to distract us from looking at that fact. Stories like this are only one example of that distraction.
kitty,
You're an easy mark.
Schroder I am well aware of the military industrial complex (aka "the iron triangle" but if someone has to land that big ass cyberspace command contract it might as well be Louisiana....We deserve it!!!!
You are talking about over 7,500 high tech jobs here and tons of revenue generated....
We have to learn how to pick our battles when it comes to fighting for Louisiana as plenty of us stil want to come home....A lot of us just can't come home and I'd love to land one of those high tech jobs and so something with my 2.5 college degrees.....
My little brother works contract for the military in the I.T. field for the military and has no degrees and no military experience but yet he makes more than I do and I have 2.5 degrees and I spent EIGHT YEARS ACTIVE DUTY ARMY ....Hell, I want my Louisiana culture and I want a good paying job....Why is that hard for Louisiana and the rest of the nation to understand?!!! Plenty of us love this state!!!!
I love you Tab and I LOVE YOU LOUISIANA!!!!
Just for the record...I think that's an Acer...it's about 600 bucks if that...lot's of plastic and shitty components.....a real piece of crap. So I think she also got victimized by Best Buy as well as HUD.
The other notable in that conspicuously framed picture....she looks as if she takes a lot of pride in her abode. She's put a lot of work into it. I don't think she takes what she has for granted. I have to admit it's tremendously cleaner than my house, which I actually do take for granted.
It would seem this argument is about what poverty really looks like. I thought I knew what poverty looked like...until I spent a month in New Delhi...that's poverty the likes of which most Americans will never experience and I honestly don't have the stomach to experience it again.
I guess my point is...actually i'm not gonna make a point...I'll just leave it there. Just observation
nightprowlkitty,
There is a world of difference between looking at the books of a corporation that has enjoyed billions of dollars of crony contracts and asking a woman why she has a big TV.
So? Both are wrong. You point to corporate welfare as an excuse to completely ignore social welfare recipients who are getting more than they deserve. I'd like to see the government get out of both, while you would tolerate the latter. It's hardly the most principled position I've seen.
I am absolutely not in favor of humiliating human beings on public assistance by making them account for every detail of their lives. We ALL benefit from tax dollars -- from roads to schools to hospitals.
We all aren't on public assistance. We all benefit from roads to schools to hospitals because we all use them (or at least always have the option). Not all of us have the option to get subsidized housing from the government, and most would expect that those who do should be in actual need. They shouldn't have expensive luxury items; they should just be getting by. Moreover, demanding no accountability from those on public assistance leads to substantial fraud and waste. I can't see why you'd support that.
I don't look at Sharon Jasper as a victim, but as a human being.
Well, I look at her at a huckster, or at least a very deluded person. She complains about minor problems with her home as if that makes it a slum, when anybody can see she's in nice digs. Trying to make excuses for her really doesn't help your cause.
Corporations are not people they are entities....It is a shame that they have managed to be classified as persons thanks to greedy lobbyists.....Our constitution clearly states "We the people" and not "We the corporations".....THAT IS WHY THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS WILL BE GIVING LOUISIANA A SHARE OF OIL AND GAS REVENUE TO THE TUNE OF MILLIONS!!! PAY UP BIG OIL!!!! NOBODY IS FEELING SORRY FOR YOUR ASSES ESPECIALLY NOT ME!!!!
I posted this comment over at Dangerblond, and thought it might be worth entering here--some of the points have already been made, but hey, a good discussion is always fun:
Um, maybe it's just me, but all things considered, it seems as if everyone's expending quite a bit of energy over what, in the end, are really crumbs in the whole scheme of things.
Yeah, the lady's got a big old TV, what looks like pretty nice furniture, and so on. It's still a pretty tiny drop in an ocean sized bucket.
And while everyone's discussing, to y'all credit, pretty reasonably, Ms. Jasper's situation, literally HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars are flowing into the coffers of various entities that certainly did NOT earn that sort of money, unless you think a mix and match of insane fearmongering and high-priced lobbying somehow counts as "earning" a no-bid, cost-plus government contract. I mean, geez: Blackwater gets a billion, even some clowns at something called The Lincoln Group took a hundred million dollars for supposedly placing "favorable" news articles about the government in the Iraqi press (as if anyone bothered to check to see if this was, you know, actually done)....
I'd guess the Blackwaters, Lincoln Groups, Halliburtons, and whatnot, are pretty well satisfied that the controversy is about an old lady in a Section 8 apartment, instead of with the taxpayer dollers they're bilking by the ton (literally: some 300 TONS of CASH has gone missing in Mesopotamia)...
owen,
what happens when those left behind by capitalism become desperate? those folks identified by adam smith? would you rather help these folks with your taxes, or spend you taxes locking them up after they become desperate?
I just won the lottery, but if I quit my job, I should still qualify for a public housing unit, right? Is that the argument? No matter what a person's net worth at the end of the day, if they don't have a monthly income, they should get tax money to subsidize their lifestyles?
For those who care to do a more careful reading of what I've been saying in recent days, I'm not really vilifying Sharon Jasper. I'm asking a question. She might have been a single mom who never had a chance to get a good start in life, worked for minimum wage in the hospitality business, may have had devastating health bills ... who knows? But I'd like to know, and yes, if she or anyone else is just collecting on my paycheck using the federal government as a surrogate instead of asking me for assistance, well, yeah, I think it's immoral. As I've said elsewhere, every generation has to struggle with poverty as a public policy issue. If we don't have a good grasp of what we're dealing with, we'll never find the appropriate policies to deal with the problem. I dare anyone in this comment section to argue that the public housing and welfare system we've had since Johnson is so perfect that it doesn't need any tweaking. I've never uttered the challenge in my life -- and trust me, I'm not comfortable taking this side on the issue, because I'm still on the fence -- but these really are times when we need to confront these issues head on, and the only way to do that, is to get a good set of information to work from. I'm clearly no expert on welfare or public housing. I just think that there are people who need help, and they ought to get it. And if they want a big-ass television that's given to them, or rented, or whatever, maybe that's okay, but there's nothing wrong in asking what's going on. That's all I've been saying. Furthermore, as Dambala noted, I spent two years and more in Honduras which has some of the worst poverty in the western hemisphere. I've seen things that would humble anyone who benefits from our public assistance programs. At the end of the day, as human beings, not a single one of us is born into the world entitled to anything. As moral beings, and as a democracy, we try to sort out as best we can how to deal with the least among us, but they aren't served well by freeloaders -- though a minority they may be -- and they aren't served well by a system which keeps them in the stations they were born into with little prospect of advancement in life. As a possible solution, how about letting hospitality workers have the freedom to form freakin' unions. That alone would place much of the burden of taking care of the working poor by transferring the costs from taxpayers to the actual users. It's about the conversation, people. Stop vilifying.
And by the way, I've been to Cuba, where I did precisely what TP reporter Coleman Warner should have done. I calculated the day-to-day expenses for an average family to uncover a reality little reported by the Castro apologists. It's difficult to have dignity when you don't have enough food to feed your family for more than about two weeks (as a doctor) and lose your daughter to the streets as a prostitute and can't vote. That's a little far afield of the discussion here, and I will concede that there were some advances in Cuba that rival the rest of impoverished Latin America. Nevertheless, what I'm trying to point out here is that we need better information in order to have a meaningful conversation. Coleman Warner should have run some numbers for us if it was his intention to do a piece on how tough it is for people to live in Section 8 housing versus public housing.
In short, I'm with Dangerblond and the yellow Jeffery.
And I don't give a flying f**k what kind of TV Sharon has.
Schroeder, if you won the lottery, of course that would be INCOME. You would have to report that and you would lose housing assistance. You would be able to estimate what you could afford to pay every month for housing out of your income. It would be very hard for the government or anyone to estimate how much personal property you could be hocking every month to pay for rent.
anonymous,
what happens when those left behind by capitalism become desperate? those folks identified by adam smith? would you rather help these folks with your taxes, or spend you taxes locking them up after they become desperate?
I'm not averse to a very minimal level of public assistance, including some housing subsidies. However, I prefer private charity in the majority of circumstances. I don't think it's a coincidence that more liberal states have lower levels of charitable giving; when people convince themselves that the government is responsible for taking care of the poor, they tend not to feel any personal obligation. I also think private charity is more effective and more efficient.
Moreover, I'm really failing to see why Section 8 is inadequate. There are numerous Section 8 rentals in the city, and the subsidies will cover almost all of the rent. Why is there a need for housing projects on top of it?
In short, I'm with Dangerblond and the yellow Jeffery.
dayum, makes Jeffery sound like he's chicken... :-)
michael,
Um, maybe it's just me, but all things considered, it seems as if everyone's expending quite a bit of energy over what, in the end, are really crumbs in the whole scheme of things.
Social assistance makes up the vast majority of the federal budget and is only growing larger. Defense spending, conversely, makes up less than one-fifth of federal spending and shrinking therefrom. Therefore, I would argue that how we manage social spending is actually more relevant to the budget as a whole than how we manage defense contracts.
Besides, your argument is just another way of ignoring the issue. We can all debate BusHitler, Helliburton and BlacKKKwater some other time. Those are separate issues not relevant here. Personally, I think reforming Social Security is far more important than reforming public housing in New Orleans. It doesn't mean that the latter isn't worth discussing.
Here's what's funny. Tonight I just watched It's a Wonderful Life ... it being Christmas and all.
And then I flipped on the computer just to see what's been stirring on the old internets since this afternoon.
This is a funny conversation to read while "Auld Lang Syne" is still ringing in your head.
Makes a nice soundtrack.
Owen--
All you've gotta do is locate the 300 plus TONS of missing cash money (if I remember right, some 8 billion dollars or more)...plus find out just what the Lincoln Group actually DID for their hundred million dollar contract (examples, please) and then you can holler as long and as loud as you want about how the poor deserve nothing more than a baseball bat to the gut...
Until then, spare me the eye-batting about what are, as I said, crumbs.
Being a person who has been on SSDI for eleven years, I do not begrudge anyone their possessions no matter their circumstances in Life.
However, I do believe that one takes care of business first (i.e.: deposits, utilities, food and the like), and then go after the goodies.
Since none of us knows the details on where Ms Jasper's TV came from, we should ignore the photo and concentrate on the realities concerning the Bricks. Don't let this single event lock you into the red-neck side of the argument.
'Nuff said.
- And by the way, I've been to Cuba
yo, dawg..spent 3 weeks there.
I hear you.
Havana...mostly. never Guantanamo....i was on the other side.
michael,
Again, you're just skirting the issue. Waste and corruption related to government contracts is a problem. So is the phenomenon of social welfare recipients having very nice apartments with big screen TVs, yet still complaining that their residence is slummy. I don't know exactly how much fraud and waste there is in the social welfare system versus in government contracts, but in the end it doesn't really matter.
We shouldn't ignore waste in one area because there's more waste in another. Nor should we completely ignore one issue because another is bigger. Again, see my social security example -- I think it needs to be means-tested and at least partially privatized to keep it solvent. Otherwise, it will continue ballooning as a part of the federal budget, making other spending issues seem trivial by comparison. However, that doesn't mean I'm doing to throw that out whenever somebody from the other side starts complaining that the Iraq War is a waste of money. Bringing up unrelated arguments is not an argument in itself; it's a dodge.
I know Ms. Jasper personally.
Ms. Jasper is elderly and retired. Let me drive these two points home, because all of the hateful/negative comments about here in the press lately assume that she is under 65 (and therefore should be working).
She worked the majority of her adult life in working class jobs and struggled to pay her bills.
She is also disabled now in addition to her age.
What's wrong with her having a big TV? So she chose to spend her money on something nice. She spends most of her time in her home, why wouldn't she decorate it and make it as beautiful as possible.
Shame on all of you for judging this woman without knowing any of the facts. You all demonstrate an ignorant attitude. You just seize upon pictures that seem to verify your anti-public housing/anti-working class biases.
Owen--
I'm just glad you weren't in charge during the levee and floodwall failures. You would've blamed it all on an elderly black woman's leaky faucet, then insisted that she got lucky because her house was obliterated, thus destroying the evidence...
I believe the picture of Ms Jasper was a set-up by the Times-Picayune. I have not found their coverage of this issue balanced at all.
What I pick up from some of the comments is that anyone on public assistance must look obviously poor at all times. People are watching.
Thanks for weighing in with some facts, Darwin. This has been a horrifying look into the prejudices of some very cool people.
There's nothing in the picture that lets you know if it's "slummy" or not...all it shows is that she takes care of it. We don't know what works or leaks.
Oyster, you posted those two quotes surrounding the cleverly selected picture. If you weren't trying to make a point about the ungrateful wasteful po' folk with their big screens, what am I supposed to take from it?
grandmere mimi
I think it is, for me at least, that people who claim to live in a slums should probably live in a slum.
The issue is the credibility of the protesters who claim than many public housing residents are being left homeless, yet fail to provide any examples.
Their rhetoric at time sounds like a school yard argument.
HANO: We have housing.
Protesters: No you don't.
HANO: Yes we do.
Protesters: Do not!
HANO: Do to!
Protesters: We don't believe you!
It has been written here that we ought to reserve judgment on Sharon Jasper. Apparently, this is a courtesy she does not care to return to others.
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2007/12/city_hall_girds_for_public_hou.html
10:15 a.m.
The meeting hasn't started yet. Council members haven't entered the chamber.
Civil sheriff's deputies continue to try and keep order, telling the people inside that they may not stand during the meeting and that everyone must have a seat. Tempers flare in one section of the chamber.
"You're a racist white man," Sharon Sears Jasper, a former St. Bernard complex resident shouts at a man seated behind her.
"Ma'am, the color of my skin isn't the issue," the man replies.
Tell me again who is injecting race into the debate.
I am loathe to join this rancorous exchange. I find it mostly counterproductive. All I'd like to say is that poverty is not just something that relates to material possessions. I cannot deny that what I have seen and read about Sharon Jasper is exasperating to me and elicits a gut reaction of disappointment and even a touch of resentment; but I refuse to go around hurling aspersions at her and elevating her personal story, whatever it may be, as if it somehow means the housing problems for the poor are non-existent.
Boyd sez: "Oyster, you posted those two quotes surrounding the cleverly selected picture. If you weren't trying to make a point about the ungrateful wasteful po' folk with their big screens, what am I supposed to take from it?"
Stop projecting.
You're supposed to take away my point: As the title and the highlighted comments indicate, Ms. Jasper is not a good example of a "victim of changing public housing policies", and the activists shouldn't have presented her as such. And if she is the best example they have, IT PLAYS INTO THE OPPONENTS HANDS, boyd! It hurts the cause, and creates backlash if you have a vocal representative who says she lives in a slum, when she doesn't. The report and the pictures make that clear-- EVEN IF THERE WAS NO DAMN TV in the photo, or even if there weren't any photos with the story, her comments about living in a slum and being better off living in a tent are false. She had an opportunity to point out to the reporter all the things that made her current residence a "slum" and she showed the reporter a leaky sink faucet and a bum door.
I've pointed out a way activists could've taken advantage of the empty/available units issue, and now there have been two front page stories on it. They're getting hammered on this, and they have no strategic sense (in political terms).
THIS POST ISN'T ABOUT MS. JASPER. IT"S ABOUT THE STRATEGIC STUPIDITY OF ACTIVISTS USING HER AS A PUBLIC EXAMPLE.
Her saying she lives in a slum and might be better off in a tent in Duncan Plaza is an insult to all the New Orleanians who are poor and are trapped in some lousy slummy leaky house with no heat or working appliances.
This afternoon I'll be waiting for hours at a social services office on Washington Avenue to apply on behalf of an illiterate man who works for minimum wage to get him on the DHAP program which is the follow up program to the FEMA housing assistance program.
Then I'll be working with Chrissa at Oddyssey House to find more housing units for the remaining homeless who were at Duncan Plaza.
That's what my afternoon looks like, boyd, but "take away" whatever you want.
darwin,
What's wrong with her having a big TV? So she chose to spend her money on something nice.
Well, if she has "big TV" money, why is she living in subsidized housing?
Furthermore, why is she so ungrateful for what she's been given? There are hard-working taxpayers subsidizing her lifestyle, which is nicer than that of many people NOT on public assistance, and all she can do is complain that her faucet leaks and a door sticks -- she's a complete ingrate.
Finally, even disabled persons can work. If she can speak on the phone, she could find a job. There's nothing preventing her from working, at least part time, in a sedentary job. If she's not even looking for a position, that makes the situation all the more deplorable.
The above comment by "mark" is mine.
michael,
I'm just glad you weren't in charge during the levee and floodwall failures. You would've blamed it all on an elderly black woman's leaky faucet, then insisted that she got lucky because her house was obliterated, thus destroying the evidence...
??? Again, nothing to do with the subject at hand.
Maybe she buys 100 lottery tickets a month and struck it rich. Or, perhaps like me, she found her TV set.
I found a big ass Sony XBR2 70' and I liked it so much, I went out the following week and found me a Sony XBR2 60' for my bedroom.
You all give her a break. People shouldn't have to go for want just because they are poor.
I wonder is she has a hot tub?
That may be all she has, with no savings account or any other security net. She lives in the now - all that and more could be taken away from her at any time.
Owen--
How to put this diplomatically? Hmmm...you're very, um...literal.
Now, perhaps you could make yourself useful--go over to Ms. Jasper's and personally tell her about all the wonderful jobs available to a woman in her position. I'm sure she'd appreciate it. When you're done there you can go sniffing around for poor people with the audacity to own luxury items like televisions--after all, you can get your evacuation warnings from the radio, not that "those people" evacuate, right? "Those people" stick around so they can loot, um, even bigger televisions (or beer). Of course, some people might wonder just how much stuff you can loot when you're wheelchair bound or using a walker, but I'll bet it's quite a bit...
Besides, their chairs and walkers are probably taxpayer subsidized, too...those ingrates, thinking they can live the semblence of a normal life with our tax dollars, unlike Erik Prince, Christian Bailey, or Paige Craig, who "earned" their millions doing...
Well, doing what, Owen? You seem to be interested in sniffing out people bilking the system. Tell me, what exactly ARE Prince, Bailey, and Craig DOING to earn their money (a hell of a lot more money than whatever puny amount Ms. Jasper is receiving in rental subsidy)? Or is your indignation selective, Owen?
michael,
I don't make it my personal business to go around finding people bilking the system. There's media, oversight organizations and watchdog groups that serve that function.
However, I recognize waste when it's plain and unambiguous, and in any case, it wasn't me who drafted this post or even commented first. I just responded with amazement when people like yourself started making excuses for Jasper and talking about irrelevant issues, as if that somehow excused what we see in that photograph. It doesn't.
Oh, and I don't appreciate the not-so-thinly-veiled accusations that I'm racist. It's juvenile.
I bet you she has the Hi def tear that costs extra. It would be a terrible waste to have that nice TV that most of you don't have and watch that Standard Definition TV broadcasts like most of you all watch. That is so 90s.
I wonder if she does pay per view? I bet she springs for Wrestle Mania.
It figures. I work two jobs, have three kids and pay a $2300.00 house note, not including utilities and such.
We wanted out of our apartment because we hated throwing money down a hole. My wife then lost her job after the first year in our home in 2004. I have been carrying the load and not asking any one for one thin dime!
We are a Hispanic/Black blended family, and times have been tough. But we will not lie, cheat or beg to get out of our responsibilities.
Now I can see why my taxes are continually going up. Scumbags like this, who are more racist than a Skinhead, stealing government money and claiming poverty.
I see this thievery every time I go to the Foodtown Supermarket to by groceries. I am buying mac and cheese and hamburger and paying cash, while the welfare fraud in front of me has steaks and potatoes using WIC and Family First cards to pay up, with hair and nails done at the salon, driving an SUV.
I know that there are people who REALLY need help. But, people like this don't and should be evicted. The 60 inch TV proves the mentality over the reality.
I don't like to live poor, either. It is either expensive Christmas gifts or a cold winter. I just put $1500.00 in oil in the tank, so it's DVD's, CD's and cheap dollies and cheap toys at the dollar store for my children.
Maybe the real hard working people should stop paying local, state and federal taxes for a week in protest. Let's see how quick they cut out these cheats on the Dole.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
The logic that says Sharon Jasper shouldn't have, or ought to account for, a big TV applies to homeowners' possessions of luxuries before they've paid off their mortgages just as much. More, in fact, since the mortgage interest deduction alone costs the federal government more than public housing and section 8 combined. And let's not forget that the 20+ year mortgage wouldn't exist if the FHA hadn't gone into the business of mortgage insurance.
As a renting taxpayer, it's more in my interest to see homeowners pay off their government-backed debts faster than it is to worry about Sharon Jasper's TV. Any mortgage-holders out there care to justify their every expenditure above the most basic necessities? I'm listening...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1942744/posts
Darwin,
If you really do know Sharon Jasper personally, then I'd like to know whether you give her the same advice you do here about not judging others so harshly. I don't know if there is anyone in this debate that has judged others more personally harshly than she has. She accuses those who differ with her point of view of racism, classism, corruption, and hatred. Seems that she is not so free of all of those flaws herself.
Darwin,
And oh, she is indeed under 65. Would think you might know that if you actually did know her personally. She says so herself.
http://neworleanslabormedia.org/after-deluge:-labor-and-community-seek-rebuild-and-renew
photo by T-P's Ted Jackson
