Re: Let's play "Deconstruct the media!" -- America's new subprime shanty-towns

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

________________________________________
From: Brock N Meeks [bmeeks () cox net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 12:24 PM
To: simon () higgs com
Cc: David Farber
Subject: Re: [IP] Let's play "Deconstruct the media!" -- America's new subprime shanty-towns

You're 100 percent correct, Simon, my rant doesn't help any of them,
not in the slightest way.

But in making your statement, there's an implication that my comment
was some how addressing people that are genuinely in need.  Again, as
I said in the original piece and in my follow up comments, the whole
point of the piece was to give a slapshot to the JOURNALISM of the
first piece.

I have my ideas about solutions, but I'm not an economist, I'm not a
domestic policy wonk, and I wouldn't dream of offering my opinion of
what solutions there might be.


On Mar 19, 2008, at 11:52 AM, Simon Higgs wrote:

> Brock,
>
> There are people out there that genuinely need help and none of your
> rant was in the slightest helpful to any of them.
>
> It might take Republicans to put these people in the tent cities
> but, by
> your example, it's obvious that the Democrats will kick them once
> they are there.
>
> Does the word "solution" mean anything to anyone anymore?
>
> I'm just saying...
>
> Simon
>
>
> David Farber wrote:
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Brock N. Meeks [bmeeks () cox net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 12:52 AM
> > To: David Farber
> > Subject: Re: [IP] America's new subprime shanty-towns
> > Someone below wonders why he "found out about this [story] from the
> > BCC and
> > not US media?"  Here's one possible answer:  it's a ginned up
> > report by a
> > clueless BBC reporter, trying to make news from nothing.
> > Let's play "Deconstruct the media!"
> > First, the title, below it says, "America's new sub-prime shanty-
> > towns" as
> > in plural.  But the piece referenced only shows one "shanty-town"
> > and makes
> > no reference, whatsoever, to others.  On the YouTube clip it says
> > "Tent
> > Cities," and of course, as mentioned, only one "tent city" is shown.
> > This is incredibly sloppy and just plain lazy journalism.  This is
> > like
> > quoting one expert in a story and writing, "expertS claim..."  Bah.
> > Next, a number is tossed out--ohhhh, we like numbers!--"in the last
> > month
> > some 60,000 houses were repossessed."  And then the reporter says,
> > "...now
> > they shower in a local church and get by on handouts..."  To this I
> > say,
> > "That must be a damn big church to handle 60,000 households wanting
> > to
> > shower, just think of the lines!"  Specious, of course.  The
> > reporter makes
> > it sound like all 60,000 households are now homeless and living in
> > the tent
> > city.  B.S. -- again, incredibly sloppy journalism.
> > Next, the first woman interviewed talks about how she hopes to get
> > a full
> > time job instead of her one-day a week job... she wants to save up
> > to buy a
> > car to get to work easier.   Sheesh, were to start?!
> > First, are we to assume she's a victim of the sub-prime meltdown?
> > I guess,
> > because there's absolutely no clue that she is.  She has a one-day
> > a week
> > job, umm.... perhaps her job status is the reason for her
> > homelessness?
> > Perhaps she lost a good paying job and couldn't make the mortgage
> > payments,
> > could happen, DOES happen, every day.  But falling victim to a
> > LOUSY LABOR
> > MARKET has no connection to the sub-prime fiasco.
> > Second interview, an older couple, now living in an RV, forced from
> > their
> > home when they could no longer make the payments.  It's a tragic
> > story, a
> > sad story and I'm not making light of ANYONE'S plight here,
> > remember, it's
> > the shabby  journalism I'm poking a sharp stick at.
> > In the same breath that we learn this couple have lost their house,
> > we learn
> > why:  the husband fell ill and they couldn't make the payments on
> > the house.
> > I'll repeat it, the husband FELL ILL and the mortgage couldn't be
> > paid.
> > Again, NOTHING to do with the sub-prime crisis, this is a health
> > related
> > tragic story.  And again, it happens hundreds or thousands of times
> > a day.
> > And the story there, perhaps, is the lack of affordable health care
> > or...
> > ??? But not "this poor couple was forced to live in this RV because
> > of the
> > sub-prime crisis."
> > The last interview is with a guy that says he sold his house "for a
> > lot less
> > than I paid for it."  But he didn't take a bath on it, or so it
> > seems,
> > because he tells the reporter that after the sale, "I settled all
> > my bills
> > and now I'm homeless."  You don't "settle all your bills" if don't
> > have
> > equity in the house.
> > And we can do some arm chair financial planning here and question his
> > choices.  Um... pay off my bills and become homeless or take that
> > money,
> > rent a miserably small apartment, thus giving me a valid address
> > which is
> > critical when applying for a job, for pubic assistance, etc., etc.
> > And then
> > while living in the crappy apartment (but infinitely better than
> > living in a
> > tent city) he could pay minimums on his remaining bills with what
> > money he
> > has left or try and work out some lower payments with the creditors
> > -- a
> > standard procedure now happening more and more.
> > But no, this guy chooses Option A and goes homeless.  Again, tragic
> > story
> > and again, we are left to assume this guy is a victim of the sub-
> > prime mess,
> > were as, I'm thinking, doesn't he have a job??  Why would he be
> > homeless if
> > he had a job?  Oh... I see, he lost his job, which probably means he
> > couldn't pay his mortgage.  Ah, see, a victim of the LABOR MARKET,
> > not the
> > sub-prime crisis.
> > I'm just saying...
> > On 3/18/08 1:14 PM, "David Farber" <dave () farber net> wrote:
> > ________________________________________
> > > From: Michael Gurstein [gurstein () gmail com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 12:20 PM
> > > To: David Farber
> > > Subject: FW: [Futurework] America's new subprime shanty-towns
> > >
> > > Might be of interest to IP...
> > >
> > > MG
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: futurework-bounces () fesmail uwaterloo ca
> > > [mailto:futurework-bounces () fesmail uwaterloo ca] On Behalf Of
> > > M.Blackmore
> > > Sent: March 18, 2008 7:50 AM
> > > To: futurework () fesmail uwaterloo ca
> > > Subject: [Futurework] America's new subprime shanty-towns
> > >
> > >
> > > America's new subprime shanty-towns
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnnOOo6tRs8
> > >
> > > Posted by Cory Doctorow, March 17, 2008 9:07 PM | permalink
> > > In this chilling BBC clip, a newsteam ventures to one of LA's new
> > > shantytowns made up of people who've lost their homes in the
> > > subprime
> > > meltdown and now live in tents, improvised shacks or RVs on
> > > abandoned land.
> > > It's the contemporary Hooverville, and, as the Subliterate
> > > Cinephile notes,
> > > I wonder why I found out about this from the BBC and not US media.
> > > Link (via
> > > The Subliterate Cinephile
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> > RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Simon Higgs


-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com