Friday, September 14, 2012

Reverse Colonialism

Birmingham under Black-control (since 1979) is an example of "reverse colonialism"
While reading There's Hope for the World: The Memoir of Birmingham, Alabama's First African American Mayor by Richard Arrington and Jimmie Lewis Franklin's hagiography of the same, Back To Birmingham: Richard Arrington, Jr. and His Times one thing became stunningly obvious: any history after the victories of the Civil Rights movement cannot be debated or discussed, the merit of the rewarding of full legal protection to Black people (and the creation of Black-Run America) far outweigh any of the negative ramifications of ceding whole cities to Black control.

It is on p.238 of There's Hope for the World that Arrington writes these words:
"In the chamber of the Birmingham City Council, on one of its walls, is the following slogan: "Cities Are What People Make Them."
 Recall that 76 percent Black Birmingham's City Council recently passed an ordinance banning the building of new payday or Title Loan stores. Cities truly are what people make them.

In 2007, The Birmingham News published a ground-breaking series that, for all intents and purposes, was a penetrating look at the legacy of the city since the Civil Rights victory and the consequences of Black-rule for Birmingham [Which Way Forward?, by Jeff Hansen, 3-11-2007]:

In the 80 years from 1890 to 1970,the city of Birmingham had a mix of people that was about 40 percent black and 60 percent white, with most black residents segregated into areas with poorer housing close to industrial sites. Beginning about 1970, the mix began to change as whites left the city. By 2005, Birmingham’s population had flipped — 76 percent black and 22 percent white.Some of Birmingham’s aging neighborhoods have become islands of the poor. A recent Brookings Institution study found that 28.9 percent of residents within the city limits live in poverty — the eighth highest percentage among America’s 100 largest cities.

What can we call this? White people abandoned Birmingham to Black majority rule, so perhaps we can call this "reverse colonialism".

It is this article from the "Which Way Forward?" series that showcases the frightening consequences (especially the financial consequences) of what the deeming of "Restrictive Covenants" as Unconstitutional meant for the long-term viability of neighborhoods that go majority Black [Blight: "It was a real nice neighborhood", Birmingham News, Thomas Spencer, 3-11-2007]:

In 1965, Virgia Wallace’s parents paid $10,000 for their piece of the American dream, a two-story, fourbedroom house in then-predominantly white Fountain Heights. Perched on the hill just north of downtown, the Wallace home had a view of the city skyline and beyond to Red Mountain. Wallace remembers her father walking to work at Loveman’s department store. “It was a real nice neighborhood,” Wallace said. 
“Quiet.” 
But the retail jobs left downtown, nearby industries shut down and the drain left holes in the community. 
As years passed, Wallace, now 66 and an English teacher at Huffman High, watched families move away. Between 1980 and 2000, the census tract that includes her home lost 39 percent of its population. Paint peeled on the abandoned houses. Windows were broken. Porches slumped. The house across the street burned and wasn’t rebuilt, leaving a vacant lot of scraggly privet and tall winter-brown grass littered with wind blown paper and plastic bags. 
An apartment complex up the street began renting to “a different kind of people,” Wallace said. They weren’t invested in the community. They sold drugs. The neighborhood became plagued with burglaries and violence.The older generation that stayed kept their houses neat, their yards trimmed, beds planted with flowers. But they also ornamented their windows and doors with burglar bars. In the early 1990s, Wallace fled the crime and blight that became the standard in neighborhoods across the inner city. She bought a house in Roebuck. After she left, the old home was broken into several times. Windows were broken, replaced with plywood. There didn’t seem any sense trying to sell it. “There wasn’t anyone interested in buying it,”she said. 
Today, Wallace still owns the home. It has an assessed value of $11,300, just $1,300 above the price her parents paid 42 years ago.
Retail jobs left downtown Birmingham because the capital, white people, left the city. Since the remaining Black population had no purchasing power - or credit (thus the need and reliance for payday and Title Loan stores now instead of banks) - the commercial viability of the new, shiny, post-civil rights Black-run Birmingham was incapable of zilch.

Most shocking though is this: the author didn't take into account inflation. Since the majority-white Fountain Heights went all-Black, we are told the house only appreciated in value by $1,300. Because most journalist have no financial acumen, they can be forgiven for this transgression against the monetary literate among us.

According to "The Inflation Calculator":
What cost $10000 in 1965 would cost $65085.24 in 2007.

Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2007 and 1965,
they would cost you $10000 and $1553.07 respectively.
That same house would cost $65,000 today. You are looking at an 83 percent drop in value from the days when Birmingham was still under white control, as compared to the value of the home post-civil rights era and the institution of Black-control in The Magic City.

Factor that out across the whole neighborhood, and you begin to realize the enormity of the financial impact that Black people have had on property value. Now, think of areas of the city that once maintained high property values (when whites resided in the subdivisions) and that were capable of both appreciating on a yearly basis and generating tax-revenue for the city to grow.

Do you now understand the concept of "reverse colonialism?"

The true costs of the turning of Birmingham over to Black-rule are... demoralizing. [Can these neighborhoods be saved/The blight in our midst, Birmingham News, by Thomas Spencer, 8-19-2007]:
79 percent of the 20,997 homes in Jefferson County that are considered less than 50 percent good by the county Board of Equalization. Sixty percent of them lie within the city of Birmingham, where 1 in 5 homes is in poor condition.
79 percent of the 8,595 properties in Jefferson County that have been in the hands of the state — many of them essentially abandoned by owners with property taxes unpaid — since at least 2005. Sixty-eight percent are in Birmingham.

The exodus created a broken real estate market in depressed neighborhoods where sellers outnumber buyers — and a city where thousands of houses and apartments were left to decay. What’s more, the Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham predicts urban blight will continue to swell.
The commission projects that by 2030 the number of households will decrease by 17 percent in East Lake and Woodlawn, 22 percent in the neighborhoods around the airport, 27 percent in North Birmingham, 13 percent in Pratt City and Ensley, and 17 percent in West End. Since 1990, the city of Birmingham has demolished 7,948 single-family houses. This year, the city plans to spend $750,000 tearing down 423 more. Even at that pace, a backlog of more than 200 homes will remain. And the list keeps growing.

Wealth has evaporated in Birmingham faster than a spilled glass of water in the hot Southern summer sun since the take-over of the city Black-political control.This is the legacy of what the civil right movements has done to one American city.

This is "reverse colonialism."

Factor that 83 percent depreciation in property value from the home highlighted in the story above across the whole city (Blight caused by the new Black majority) and you realize the importance of restrictive covenants in maintaining not just the financial integrity of a community, but actually maintaining a community with any social capital as well.

Cities are what people make of them...

56 comments:

Whiskey said...

That is an excellent point. However, practically speaking Restrictive Covenants and Black political control are givens. For one thing, as Blacks are the core voting bloc of Democrats, they will never EVER agree to any ending of Restrictive Covenants.

What can be done then? In my view, a retreat into sprawling exurbs and cyberspace. The development of the web is the substitution of old cities with new associations on the internet.

Sprawling, mobile, ever changing exurbs and a permanence in cyberspace is all that is left. Yes, reverse colonialism. But the arrow of time only goes one way. Not the reverse.

blanc de seine saint denis said...

hello, for those who remember i'm a french guy who has lived in villiers le bel where riot shoot the city in 2007. It's the same hosing problem there because in 30 yeras , blacks go from 1% to 60% of the people's city. So price housing in villiers up to 60% in 10 years compare to 130% up in france in general.
I live now at 40 kms south of paris and there are 99% white, it remembers the good old time..and there is no criminality, we can let our car open, my daughter is ins chool with only white students...so no private school..I pay i, gas for the car but i'm cool. The situation in france this summer has been very hot with civil war of 3 dayx in amiens, mulhouse and toulouse. In marseille, a membor near the mayor ask the state to send the army! Tehre will not be civil war in france but we will be like brazil i think and when islam will take the power we will have to take the boat, french people is too egoistic to make war and say islam go outside.

Anonymous said...

"Cities are what people make of them..."

Exactly. Just like what I say to my DWL friends (many are converting to those who can see; keep hope alive, all):

"Why does Africa suck? Cause it's full of Africans. You expected differently in the cities here?"

First they laugh and call you a racist. Then they just laugh. Then they start to think.

YIH said...

I've been catching up but this statement in the Gary Indiana thread caught my eye:
With once exception - I'm not sellin' to no goddam colored. I'd put a torch to it first.
If this anon White makes good his threat he would likely be screwed. Let's say for the sake of argument this house has Homeowner's Insurance on it guess what'll happen? They will investigate, and if it turns out to be arson (by necessity, insurance companies have gotten pretty good at sussing that out) he will quite likely face charges and if the insurance company can get him convicted they won't have to pay out.
So in reality he will either abandon (that's assuming he owns the property outright) or sell to the first White-appearing individual that can close the deal. And what will that ''real estate investor'' do? Live there? Surely you jest. He'll rent it out, and quite likely not to a White family. These days that's quite risky, White families might suddenly get unemployed and be unable to pay the rent then they have to go through the hassle and expense to evict and quite likely the hassle and expense to rehab the place for the next tenants.
Buuuut that Section 8 check is guaranteed every month and minorities are less likely to complain about maintenance issues because they'd rather not be bothered by the landlord who might catch them doing or having something illegal.
''Real estate investors'' love 'White flight' because it makes more properties available to buy and rent out.

I'm all white! how about you? said...

my father was a fireman in the rust belt of america. he told me that in the projects in the early 60's when they went to fight fires in the projects they noticed how nice the grass was cut and this was before the maintenance dept did these things for the lazy spooks. he said there wasn't one broken window and at that time the firetruck and the firemen weren't seen as the enemy. he said the older spooks would ask the firemen if they needed help with the old ladders. so where and when did they start not chipping in? it must be when the gov't took over as the father figure of the house. when that happened the black male was deemed useless except for his lazy seed to reproduce. in those days before almighty welfare the black male was the bread winner and was needed in the home to bring home the bacon. in theory this is why there are more blacks in jail it's simply the fact that those black bitches need no longer the black male for that paycheck. so by L.B.Johnson giving the blacks the moon with white america's money. he has put more ngr's behind bars than any other person maybe in history. and these toads that seem to always need a leader haven't figured that out yet. and the real sad thing is this has trickeled down to the white woman lately. so in my theory when the black male isn't needed in the home anymore he has time to sell drugs and stay out all night and try to fuck white stupid women and all the other vices that you can think of. that's why it seems that most male spooks aren't grown up compaired to his white counter part. i guess when you aren't needed to feed your baby, and pay the rent you don't need to grow up and be responsible like our society expects. so by giving away the welfare most black males give away their freedom. i say shit if we weren't so f-ing broke in this country i'd say give them black mean bitches just a little more if it put more dumb ngr's behind bars and out of my back window or on the street corner pushing more drugs to those white kids. i guess it's damned if you do, and damned if you don't. godspeed!!! this just in ole barry soetoro(like most spooks) just got downgraded again. man leave a spook with a checkbook and bad things are gonna happen. we as a country should be so embarrassed that we are downgraded. now it's official we are all spooks according to the banks. damn those slave traders.

Anonymous said...

Our neighborhood was once so nice and so clean
But blacks moved in and it's now dirty & obscene
We used to be safe and didn't have to lock our doors
But blacks moved in and we all know the score
Crime is way up and the neighborhoods gone down
With blacks everywhere acting like fools and behaving like clowns
There's muggers and thugs and drug dealers galore
with feral children runnnig wild
And even crack whores
Yes, the blacks are all ignorant, all loud and low class
And can't wait to chimp out and show that black ass
But you can't say a word or "You're a racist!" they'll scream
As they take a huge monster shit on your American Dream

HaroldC said...

The thing about the law is that there is almost always a work around. Measures can be put in place that would in effect insure the racial integrity of white neighborhoods. Instead of a restriction that is on its face racially discriminatory other protections can be put in place.

Restrictions
Subdivisions are created by developers. The developers may or may not build the dwellings in the community. The developer however is almost always the 'Declarant' however in putting in place the restrictive covenants. The developer as declarant generally maintains control of the board of directors for the hoa so long as it owns a certain percentage of lots/units in the community. The board or its appointed officers or committees enforce the restrictive covenants. There is absolutely no prohibition on the developer reserving to itself or its successor (the hoa) the right of first refusal for every lot sold in the subdivision/community. A right of first refusal is an interest that requires an owner in the subdivision who intends to sell his lot/unit to first offer to sell to the holder of the right of first refusal. Any decent attorney who sees that there is a right of first refusal out there is going to require the holder of that right to put in writing that it has declined to exercise that right of first refusal. The right of first refusal is appurtenant to the real property and not a personal limitation to the first property owner. Protecting the racial integrity of white communities through the right of first refusal however will require however that it be exercised with the goal of protecting the communities racial integrity. Fortunately however protecting property values has a strong correlation with protecting the racial integrity of white communities.

Other techniques for maintaining the racial integrity of white communities can also be employed through the restrictive covenants. There would have to also be prohibitions on leasing any residence in the community or in the alternative very tight restrictions. This would prevent Section 8 obviously but would also prevent white owners from moving in Negroes or Hispanics as tenants. Perhaps the board would have to approve prospective tenants to insure compatibility with the neighborhood. Restrictions can also be drafted so stringently that Negroes or Hispanics are more apt to be in violation than whites. Limitation such as no junk cars, noise limitations. Strict enforcement of these limitations and assessing fines to the fullest extent possible would dissuade many undesirables from even considering buying into the community.

Fortunately the measures described above are not limited to new communities. Those neighborhoods not subject to any restrictions can form an association and put in place restrictions binding by all those agreeing to them. And likewise those restrictions would continue to be binding on all future property owners unless the property is released by the other property owners.

Private Clubs
Measures other than those employed through artful drafting and application of restrictive covenants surely exist. Private clubs are also another measure. It would function similarly to an association except that exclusion would not be through exercising or not exercising a right of first refusal but by admitting or not admitting members. Private clubs can discriminate currently. It would just be that one of the benefits of one of these clubs is also housing instead of merely restaurant, pool and golf course access.

Conclusion
I'm sure that there are other measures that can be employed to protect the integrity of white communities. I'm more familiar with HOAs because that is part of the area of law I practice.

Mr. Rational said...

Those are excellent ideas, HaroldC.  Something else that might work is a capitation tax, owed by the property owner.  Say, anyone over the age of 5 residing in the community for more than 30 days per year requires the payment of an annual fee.  This hits the Mexicans as well as the Blacks "staying" places, and you can bust them with additional fines for tax evasion.

When they don't pay, you foreclose for the unpaid taxes and fines and throw them out.

Anonymous said...

Also housing co-ops.

Sheila said...

If I lived in a majority White neighborhood, I would never consider selling to a black. As it is, however, I live in a majority Indian/Chinese neighborhood. When (with God's grace) we are in a position to move much farther out to a White area, I plan on selling to one of the Chicago blacks who are flooding this previously White, conservative suburb to disrupt the Asians' nice, little foreign enclave. There is one DWL divorcee and her children down the street (she's a big Obama supporter), but I would never recommend that a White move into this environment.

Anonymous said...

Whites will be back in these dumps because "UN Agenda 21" aka "sustainable development" will drive whites back. It's called "rural cleansing." Suburbs are "unsustainable" don't you know. So are roads, suburban single family homes, AC, meat and a host of other niceties. Did you know that it is "social injustice" for you, as a white person, to want to live in an environment away from crime laden cities? As the economy continues to be deliberately collapsed, people are being driven off their land, out of their "under-water" suburban homes into the arms of the green commies who will control EVERY aspect of your life. If you don't understand what is happening beyond race, it's time to get a clue. Race is just one of many tactics being used to advance this global agenda. Look up www.freedom advocates.org and start reading.

Mutant Swarm said...

YIH brings up some good points.

"With once exception - I'm not sellin' to no goddam colored. I'd put a torch to it first."

Well guess what, Mr. Homeowner? If you put it on the market and a black accepts your offer, and you back out, you get sued for breech of contract. They'll probably GIVE him your house as part of the settlement. There was a fellow in Arizona a few years back who allegedly shot at a couple of illegals, who then sued him. The court gave the illegals the guy's ranch.

And forget about arson. Most people aren't smart enough to do it and get away with it (and I include myself in that statement). The tipoff is when you show up to the emergency room with third degree burns over 60% of your body. Plus, people can tell a lie, but it takes a whole hell of a lot of work to get physical evidence to lie.

As YIH said, this White homeowner would be screwed. More than a cheerleader on prom night.

"...Buuuut that Section 8 check is guaranteed every month and minorities are less likely to complain about maintenance issues because they'd rather not be bothered by the landlord who might catch them doing or having something illegal. ''Real estate investors'' love 'White flight' because it makes more properties available to buy and rent out."

Ever see those hand-lettered signs on light poles that say "We Buy Houses!" and a phone number?" Well, I'm pretty sure that these are the "investors" YIH is talking about. Right now I have two houses that I'm pretty sure are Section 8 rental in my neighborhood. If I see two more in a year, I'm calling one of those numbers. My house needs repairs that would eat up my savings. If these clowns will buy it "as-is," and they give me enough to pay off the mortgage plus $1, I'm outta here.

That's assuming the ghettos don't explode between now and January, of course.

fnn said...

"With once exception - I'm not sellin' to no goddam colored. I'd put a torch to it first."

That's historical urban white ethnic language from the 1960's. I don't think it was ever meant to be taken literally.

pat said...

America was in a sense founded on genocide. The Amerindians who occupied the continent were wiped out by smallpox. This wasn't intended genocide, but it turned out very well for the European settlers anyway.

Had they not conviently died out, we would have had much the same sort of problem with the Indians that we have now with blacks. We have been spared that experience by the smallpox virus. There may be a similar genocide of blacks coming.

I don't favor the genocide of blacks. I don't think the American government and people will ever endorse or even allow genocide, but we may not always be in charge.

It could happen this way.

China wants some lebensraum just as Japan did half a century ago. Japan looked south to the largely empty Autralian continent. However those lands were defended by well organized white people. China may very well prefer the softer target of South Africa.

South Africa has better soil than Australia. But more importantly it is undefended. China could invade South Africa with its available resources right now. In a decade, Africa will be weaker still and China stronger. China has plenty of its own people, it will not need the local black people. If China invades I expect the native blacks to die out in one way or another.

Russia under Putin or some Muslim nation might beat China to it. Egypt is in the news today. It is also seriously overpopulated. Some Iman need only to announce some previously overlooked Koranic passage that promised the faithful a destiny in Africa - and millions of poor Egyptians would sail south for the invasion. America could stop that of course but South Africa alone couldn't.

Blacks are not likely to hold South Africa much longer in an over populated world.

There is a black tide now inundating our cities. But that tide seems about to turn.

Albertosaurus

Whiskey said...

Upon further thought, I believe the only way to undo BRA is to kill the money flow.

BRA runs on a money flow, specifically large government. Kill that and you kill BRA, moreover you FORCE Blacks to be responsible for themselves, and while they won't be founding new Apple Computers, they can and have historically when depending upon themselves acted better. You can read Louis Armstrong's biography for how Blacks behaved in Segregated, non-Welfare America.

Kill the Federal Government, reduce it to a tenth of its size, let it do only defense, and a few other "national" things like NASA, the Superhighways, the FBI, R&D grants, and do those well, and you kill BRA.

Because suddenly BLACKS CANNOT MOVE. It takes money, mostly Welfare money from the Feds flowing down to the States and then to local governments in block grants to produce the social mobility. Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, and parts of San Diego have remained Whitopias because they are very expensive. Indeed SF got far less Black by gentrification, making the place too damn expensive to live. That's fine for wealthy gays and SWPL living off trust funds, but for ordinary White Americans that doesn't work for family formation.

Instead, simply cut off welfare. Require social and physical mobility to depend on: not having kids you cannot pay for yourself, deferred gratification and education/skills that PAY, constant saving, and strong family social networks. In short, how Whites lived circa say 1870-1965.

You cannot bring back Restrictive Covenants. That's never going to fly, among them elites/women/gays/SWPL find it ugly and "racist" and depressing. That won't fly. But killing BRA by killing government, arguing from a fiscal and liberty standpoint that a big government consumes all money from the middle class and is by definition tyrannical in every aspect of daily life, that is very powerful. It is the Tea Party argument and has as a major impact the cut off of money.

It takes money to move from Black dominated Birmingham to Seattle. If you want to save Seattle, and prevent it from becoming Detroit, you have to make it impossible for people without middle class incomes INDEPENDENT OF GOVERNMENT to move there.

Yes that will be a fight. But because less government = more money for White middle class, you suddenly have significant political allies -- every taxpayer April 15th. This also includes sales taxes too btw. The argument being Government is a bad deal, Joe Average Middle Class gets ripped off and only the very poor and very rich get stuff. It has the virtue of being true, and giving people their money and freedom back.

Discard said...

Albertosaurus: Blacks, being a grossly inferior race mentally, pose as much an obstacle to organized, determined Whites as coyotes do. Blacks will survive only as long as others will tolerate them. I've long felt that we should just grab whatever parts of Africa as we think we can use, before the Chinese or Hindus do it first. In 100 years, sub-Saharan Africa will have more giraffes than Blacks.

SwampThizzle said...

People who want to get away with arson use greasy Lay's-style potato chips as kindling. They burn hot and leave nothing behind and are cheap and readily available. Set a fire with potato chips by an electrical outlet and the investigators will likely conclude that it was an electrical fire.

http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/7501919888/m/2721918089

Anonymous said...

"Upon further thought, I believe the only way to undo BRA is to kill the money flow."

Thread winner.

If the federal government was totally financed with taxes, there would be a massive revolt. So BRA gets its funding by selling bonds. These bonds are bought by the big money center banks. The Federal Reserve buys (creates money) these bonds from the banks which a) allows them to buy more bonds and b) the remaining bank funds are deposited with the Fed and serve as the base of a pyramid of fractional reserve lending. This is a sweetheart deal between the banks (which now have a backstop for making risky loans like mortgages for negroes) and gives BRA a market for its debt. This in turn allows the federal government to spend far more than it could under direct taxation. The money the Federal Reserve creates to buy the debt filters through the federal government and the financial system, stock market etc. until by the time it gets to the rest of us, it has bid up prices of goods (inflation).

Additionally savers are punished by artificially low interest rates. This removes an alternative to debt financing and gives the banking system a a choke hold on economic activity.

It is impossible to maintain a welfare state or an overseas empire without a central banking system. This is precisely why the Bank of England was formed.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, the "Tea Party" has been co-opted by the Republican party which has absolutely NO interest in getting rid of the Federal Reserve.

Muaytyson said...

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, the "Tea Party" has been co-opted by the Republican party which has absolutely NO interest in getting rid of the Federal Reserve.
________________________________

One hope is that the Tea Party can resist and force the Repukes to behave in more accordance with their core beliefs.

I think the Tea Party is a great idea because if it a way to fulfill the goal of reducing the Federal Government which crushes BRA.

Whiskey said...

Anon that is not true, already the Fed's latest money drop from virtual helicopters has Congressional Republicans openly calling for single terms for Fed Chairs and audits. Policy is not made by declaration, Obama did not come out for gay marriage in 2008 facing election. Only to shore up support among SWPL in 2011.

The Fed has been extremely damaging for savers and for long-term investment. Among other things the dirt-cheap money and interest rates have produced the liquidity trap (people hoard cash, don't invest in long-term assets) which has killed in macro terms the IPO market for things like Facebook, major wealth generators. True it pumps up sugar-high stocks and commodities, and forces some money into short-term junk bonds for yield-chasing. But most people just sit on cash, figuring interest rates are going up long-term, since that new money has to go somewhere.

Even if you just froze in place Black rule in Birmingham, but eliminated welfare, block grants, and thus the subsidization of BRA, Black mayors would not have money to throw around. There would be no welfare checks every month. Women with five kids by different fathers would have to work, and place kids into orphanages or religious charities for care. Female hypergamy among Black women would be in check because the sexiness of today would cost food on the table tomorrow.

Birmingham would not be what it was. But it would be better than what it is.

Anonymous said...

Additionally savers are punished by artificially low interest rates.

Which brings up a point that may possibly be relevant here. Back when I was a kid, you could put money in your savings account which would draw something like 5% interest per year. These days, the interest rates are a fraction of that. Once in America, saving money was a means to make money -- you could double your savings every "X" number of years by letting your money draw interest. OK, there was inflation, but at least back then there was an impetus to save for the average American.

But that world is gone. What do people do to save these days? 401s? IRAs? The stock market? Investing in their own houses (we saw where that one went!)? Well...

Thing is, one aspect of the America we grew up is gone insofar as debt and not savings has become the primary impetus for growth.

You wonder if this can be connected to BRA. It's another means to knock the props out of the middle class and working poor.

Just thinking aloud here...

Anonymous said...

Hi S., you sound like a 'nice [Jewish?] gal.

USA is ruined by immigration, of anti white, anti Christians...

' Anonymous Sheila said...

If I lived in a majority White neighborhood, I would never consider selling to a black. As it is, however, I live in a majority Indian/Chinese neighborhood. When (with God's grace) we are in a position to move much farther out to a White area, I plan on selling to one of the Chicago blacks who are flooding this previously White, conservative suburb to disrupt the Asians' nice, little foreign enclave. There is one DWL divorcee and her children down the street (she's a big Obama supporter), but I would never recommend that a White move into this environment'.... SAD STORY

HaroldC said...

For all the people who are up in arms saying the man won't get away in burning down his house because it would be insurance fraud. The man didn't say anything about attempting to recover any insurance if he were to burn down his house.

You can burn your house down if you want to by dousing it with gasoline and lighting the match then put it on YouTube. But it's not insurance fraud if you don't make a claim.

nameispointless said...

Urban sprawl "infill" homes and high rise townhouses/duplexes are coming to my self governing Bay Area suburb. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Regional Housing Needs Determination of Northern California has determined that our little town is not doing its regional housing requirement part to facilitate and encourage development of diverse and affordable units to accommodate a diversity of citizens in terms of age, socio-economic background, disabilities, and other special needs.
If this were not so serious, it would be funny: the building contractor hired is a proven sleazebag with customer ripoff complaints published all over the Net. So much for quality assurance.
It seems a 99% white/Asian suburb with its high percentile STAR rating school, safe streets, low crime, uniquely constructed homes on large parcels, [not ticky-tacky cheek by jowl look-alikes], populated by successful professionals with intact families who participate in community and school functions is untenable to these globalist thugs whose lives are committed to destroying Western civilization as we know it.
Residents, mostly liberal Berkeley escapees who moved here for the schools, are for it. When I asked on our local blog, "are you ready for voucher holding neighbors?" I was pounced on as a raving maniac paranoid racist. Most, [except for a few realists] replied, "this village needs some diversity;", one sarcastically said, "God forbid any color should be seen on our streets."
This mind-boggling ignorance in spite of numerous "it never happens here" incidents of residential robberies, ATM shakedowns, small store hold-ups, purse snatchings, carjackings and thefts occurring in the last two years. Crimes all committed by roving, predatory black Richmond or Oakland thugs.
This is part of our crypto-Marxist community organizer's, "Sustainable Communities Inititive," disingenuously presented to the naive [university brainwashed DWL villagers on the board] in impenetrable buzz word jargon such as "sustainablility," "regional tax-base sharing," and the aforementioned, "regionalism."
Reality translation? A shakedown. Affluent suburban hard earned tax money will now spill into a bottomless common pot for redistribution to bankrupt, low, or non tax paying urban municipalities in this county. [High black population Richmond is almost entirely tax dependent, other communities sinking fast as blacks resettle in outer county ex-urbs].
As others have commented, we are not alone. The well funded construction, “regional planning grants," many of them in battleground states like Florida, Virginia, and Ohio, are poised to recommend more re distributive policies, as well as transportation and development plans, all designed to undercut America’s suburbs and redistribute your and my taxes. It's coming fast, folks, and most people don't see it.
Contractors have already broken ground on this project.
I have done my best at meetings and on our community blog to talk sense to these people, but it only pisses them off. They are blind.

gr29az said...

why is it that every slum in this country are in states controled by democrats?

YIH said...

HaroldC said...

For all the people who are up in arms saying the man won't get away in burning down his house because it would be insurance fraud. The man didn't say anything about attempting to recover any insurance if he were to burn down his house.

You can burn your house down if you want to by dousing it with gasoline and lighting the match then put it on YouTube. But it's not insurance fraud if you don't make a claim.

Technically that's true, you're destroying your own property, but still not advised. The fire will still draw attention (someone's likely to call the Fire Dept.) and if the fire spreads beyond your property line the criminal charge of arson comes back into play. Or if where you live is under a 'burn ban' typical in FL the first half of the year. And quite likely CO is still under one due to fire situation out there.
If Ann Barnhardt torched her home she would likely get busted for arson for example.

Anonymous said...

At what point will Americans emulate what white South Africans have done (and continue to do) by getting the hell out of Dodge?

Majority-black and black-run societies INEVITABLY turn into cesspools of crime and poverty.

HaroldC said...

YIH what you say is true. But I was only countering the point of arson in regards to insurance fraud. I made no mention implicitly or explicitly of any other consequence of burning down your own house. The potential other legal consequences are sufficiently obvious that they did not need mentioning.

Discard said...

You can destroy your house with an axe. Glass, drywall, wooden trim, and wood siding if you have it, are fragile. Turn off the power and hack away at the wall switches and outlets. Nice flooring and any built in cabinets will need replacing after a few whacks, and you can remove all the visible plumbing with a pipe wrench.
It's your house and you can do what you want, but burning is a threat to your neighbors and will get you prison, especially if you burn for racist reasons.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey, the Repukes may not like Bernanke because he is supposedly helping Obama with more easy money. But the GOP has absolutely no problem with the Federal Reserve System.

To borrow from Klinton, "Don't end it, mend it."

Anonymous said...

A lot of people here mention the section 8 program in relation to deteriorating neighborhoods. Has anyone looked into suing the housing departments on racial discrimination? Why is it that section 8 goes so overwhelmingly to Negroes. Why can't we sue the hsouing authprity to provide section 8 housing in propertion to the population. If a city is 50% white and 50% black, why does 97% of the section 8 go to blacks? We should sue the housing authorities so that half of the section 8 housing vouchers have to go to white people.

Anonymous said...

I don’t know why someone put different races on the planet earth. If the earth was homogeneous, white people would be out of the space now.

Bogolyubski said...

Anon:
Which brings up a point that may possibly be relevant here. Back when I was a kid, you could put money in your savings account which would draw something like 5% interest per year. These days, the interest rates are a fraction of that. Once in America, saving money was a means to make money -- you could double your savings every "X" number of years by letting your money draw interest. OK, there was inflation, but at least back then there was an impetus to save for the average American.

But that world is gone. What do people do to save these days? 401s? IRAs? The stock market? Investing in their own houses (we saw where that one went!)? Well...

Thing is, one aspect of the America we grew up is gone insofar as debt and not savings has become the primary impetus for growth.

You wonder if this can be connected to BRA. It's another means to knock the props out of the middle class and working poor.

Just thinking aloud here...


The "free-market economy" trumpeted by the Ministry of Truth is a lie (like everything else coming from them). Simply put, there is nothing free about a rigged market. If one person at the Monopoly board has a printer under his seat and can create money at any time with the touch of a button, which all other players are forced at gunpoint to accept as legitimate, that player (and his cronies) will completely control the game. We need to stop confusing banksterism with capitalism or free-enterprise. They're not the same.

That's why we see folks like John Corzine just walk away from brazenly stealing billions worth of customer accounts. That's why the vampire-squids can make crap loans to BRA and have their employees in the regime vote them taxpayer bailouts. The so-called "free-market" in the west is a complete myth. Apart from some small local-level activity, it is simply non-existent. Most in the country are in debt - having borrowed fake money from the friends of the cartel with the magic money-button, who are completely unaccountable.

Whiskey's point about the Republicans is yet another example of how completely pervasive and successful the scam is. Yes, a few Republicans are making promises about "holding the Fed [the unaccountable private banking cartel] accountable". Uh-huh. The same R-jerseys also made promises to abolish the Dept. of Edumacation, end welfare, affirmtive-action, abortion, repeal odious gun-control laws, repeal or derail Obamacare, and cut spending. They have done absolutely nothing on any of these promises over the decades. Just last week, while the Ministry of Truth was hyperventilating over the latest production of the Springtime for Allah grand Ummah tour in Libya, the Republican House of Representatives voted to continue the implementation of Obamacare. Among those voting "yes" was the überfiscalhawk Paul Ryan.

Whiskey is quite correct about the source of money which keeps BRA on the march. He's dead wrong about Republican intentions to actually do anything. There sole intention is to lie and deceive. Like their D-jersey team-mates, they serve those who designed, created and implemented the BRA campaign of genocide against YT. The D-jersey pol carries her BRA banner openly, while the R-jersey (to quote Cicero) "moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government, itself."

cardo said...

Hey Kersey, check this out: City Journal.

Anonymous said...

Decades ago, as a libty, I had a discussion with a Marxist in a record store. When in the course of discussion I said "free market" he immediately broke out laughing. I got mad of course. He said, "You don't get it. There IS no free market."

He was right. There isn't, not in the big scheme of things. Not in a world of fractional reserve banking, the world financial system as it is.

There is a big difference between "free enterprise" on a daily basis and capitalism, as such.

Capitalism and Marxism-Leninism, known as Communism, have one thing in common. They don't exist. Not in a pure form. They cannot and do not.

Pure capitalism is a world like Galt's Gulch in Malice Rosenbaum's second magnum opus,Atlas Shrugged. It's fictional. It can no more exist in reality than can the Starship Enterprise complete with Transporter and warp drive. Those things violate the real laws of physics as we know them.

Communists, when asked which countries were Communist, would answer-correctly-"None of them, at present". The USSR and its satellite states were never, by their own admission, Communist. They were Socialist states, Socialism being the transition state between 'bourgeois capitalism' and Communism, a state as imaginary as the Starship Enterprise, which in theory (their theory) would exist when the organs of the State would wither away because the New Communist Man would be self-governing and not need their 'assistance' in doing the right, i.e., the Communist thing.

So you have a state in between, supposedly, one imaginary state and another imaginary state.

You can not have a Communist state, we found out, from the experience of the Soviet Union. It imploded as soon as the global financial overlords decided that was the thing to do. The Reagan maneuvers, consisting of making the Saudis drop sweet light crude prices to cut off the Sovs' hard currency generators and instituting the SDI program which the Soviets thought meant ending "mutual assured destruction", provided the pretext.

In reality, SDI was "The Corbomite Maneuver" played in real life. Unlike warp drive, Transporters, or those time travel episodes, SDI does not violate fundamental laws of physics. It is, however, very much more technically challenging than at first thought: it had no chance of working in Reagan's lifetime and little of working in mine. (I'm not quite 50 yet.) I have talked with emigre Russian officers who knew that in the 1980s, and told that to the highest organs. They were ignored.

It's about race, not economic systems. Sweden and New Zealand were socialist, and as a consequence suffered economically, but both were highly livable, safe places,throughout most of their postwar history. It was not because of their governments or economic systems that black and brown nations were almost universally pestholes. On the contrary, it's the other way around.

Anonymous said...

'hy is it that every slum in this country are in states controled by democrats'

we import more and more 3rd worlders...
USA is finished.
Sad but true.

slums = immigrants and blacks.

Zenster said...

… any history after the victories of the Civil Rights movement cannot be debated or discussed, the merit of the rewarding of full legal protection to Black people (and the creation of Black-Run America) far outweigh any of the negative ramifications of ceding whole cities to Black control.

That is because, as with the majority of Leftist ideology, any perceived merit or value regarding its racial policies positively withers under the magnifying glass of honest debate or legitimate critical analysis.

The entire Snivel Rights Movement™ is a study in "Selective Universalism". Yes, you read that correctly, Selective Universalism. Who else do you think would be working the hardest to undermine Universal Human Rights? Certainly not our so-called Conservatives. Only Liberals are capable of the Olympic-class gymnastic contortions required to warp reality to such an extent. To wit:

The idea of universal human rights has become ever more obsolete writes Caroline Fourest for Perlentaucher (German text), and, ironically, Western liberals have been a key force in its dismantling. "At the United Nations, the states cite 'national circumstances' as grounds for making exceptions to the application of the universal declaration of human rights. In the name of anti-imperialism left-wing activists denigrate universalism as neo-colonialism."

There you have it, "exceptions to the application of the universal declaration of human rights". No "Conservative" alive could spew such nonsense and avoid being shouted off the stage. Yet, Liberals can get away with supporting tyranny and totalitarianism while dodging much deserved calumny in the name of thwarting "neo-colonialism".

I'm still waiting for some sort of outcry by these bleeding heart bastards over Communist China's infiltration of sub-Saharan Africa. But wait! That's a Socialist entity engaging in the uplift of our poor brown brothers so everything must be just hunky-dory, no?

What can we call this? White people abandoned Birmingham to Black majority rule, so perhaps we can call this "reverse colonialism".

Given the barely concealed worldwide genocide by Blacks against Whites, the term "White Flight" no longer applies. What we are faced with is a genuine diaspora which portends huge ramifications for this world's future.

[to be continued]

Zenster said...

In their lust for a deracinated West, Liberals cannot bring themselves to consider the implications of what deconstructed Western civilization really means. With their delusions of adequacy—a mutually shared trait with Blacks and Muslims—they greedily anticipate wresting the reins of power from their minority shock troops once the walls have come tumbling down.

Little do these ethically compromised morons realize that their Black and Muslim pets will be at the ready to slit every pro-feminist, gay-loving, sexually liberated, gun hating throat in sight.

But they also ornamented their windows and doors with burglar bars.

That's one hell of a strange way to describe a self-imposed jail cell. I can only suppose that Spencer regards a bike lock as "decorative".

There didn’t seem any sense trying to sell it. “There wasn’t anyone interested in buying it,” she said.

What, no Liberals eager to diversify their own lives by moving into a vibrant, culturally enriched neighborhood that they have struggled so hard to impose on everyone else? What gives?

Factor that out across the whole neighborhood, and you begin to realize the enormity of the financial impact that Black people have had on property value.

Far beyond any rhythmic or athletic prowess, first and foremost, Blacks excel at wealth vaporization.

Wealth has evaporated in Birmingham faster than a spilled glass of water in the hot Southern summer sun since the take-over of the city Black-political control.

Most telling of all is how they manage an almost magical process of direct sublimation whereby there is no intermediate phase of condensed value. Instead, with almost superluminal velocity, an item of value metamorphoses into worthless dreck at the slightest touch of a Black hand.

The concept of wealth creation is as foreign to Blacks as Einstein's theory of relativity. Black social capital cannot be broken down beyond the village level as only at that collective level is there adequate combined intelligence to achieve even marginal functionality. As individuals, Blacks are too contentious and lax for any significant progress to be made.

Sub-Saharan Africa is enduring proof of The Black Legacy™.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the article in City Journal, I found this howler:

"The traditional grievance narrative doesn’t capture the imagination of entrepreneurial Nigerians in Houston or Somalis in Minneapolis."

Contrary to what the article claims, I would bet that the black return to the South is based upon an economy that can support public sector jobs and benefits. Plus "it jes too damn cold up here and it be lots more warmer down dare. And dey gots better b-ball teams.

Anonymous said...

"It's about race, not economic systems."

Certainly Whites can make ANY economic system work better. But even highly motivated religious zealots couldn't make the Christian communes work in the 19th century.

YIH said...

@HaroldC:
YIH what you say is true. But I was only countering the point of arson in regards to insurance fraud. I made no mention implicitly or explicitly of any other consequence of burning down your own house. The potential other legal consequences are sufficiently obvious that they did not need mentioning.
That we are even debating this proves we are White.
The idea that we could be punished for even doing what we discuss (in a fictional context) is enough to discourage it.
As Detroit has proven People™ aren't capable of 'thinking ahead', they just react regardless of the ramifications.

Anonymous said...


Certainly Whites can make ANY economic system work better. But even highly motivated religious zealots couldn't make the Christian communes work in the 19th century.


Yes, but those communes usually peacefully devolved, or evolved, into things that did work. The Shakers, of course, didn't have children and died out that way, but there are plenty of descendants, say, of the Oneida Community. Many were considered highly respectable in life although they were technically bastards.

Bogolyubski said...

Zenster:
I'm still waiting for some sort of outcry by these bleeding heart bastards over Communist China's infiltration of sub-Saharan Africa. But wait! That's a Socialist entity engaging in the uplift of our poor brown brothers so everything must be just hunky-dory, no?

You'll be waiting an awfully long time in that case. I did actually read a BBC report about two years ago which mentioned the terrible conditions in Mugabeland and how the Chinese were abusing the poor negroids who worked the fields for them in a few of the agricultural enterprises which were set up. Want to take a wild guess as to whose fault it was that the Chinese were treating the groids so poorly? You guessed it .... YT! The Chinese, you see, learned the evil colonialist practices of the Brits and are now duplicating them there. So, there you have the very model of modern major journalism: It's still YT's fault - even after YT is dead and gone!

BTW, Mugabeland has largely been cleansed of YT thanks to the tireless groid thuggery of ZANU-PF and friends. The "breadbasket of Africa" can't feed itself any longer. But, the regime in Sodom-on-Potomac has been sending food, even before D'Won on d'downlow assumed the position. There's one thing you can always count on the Republicans for - the wrong thing. (The beatings will continue, etc.)

Zenster said...

Bogolyubski: We need to stop confusing banksterism with capitalism or free-enterprise. They're not the same.

Thank goodness someone's paying attention. America's entire economy is slowly being strangled by an oligarchy who would sooner see this entire nation impoverished rather than give over an iota of control that they have manipulatively appropriated.

Anonymous said...

"Little do these ethically compromised morons realize that their Black and Muslim pets will be at the ready to slit every pro-feminist, gay-loving, sexually liberated, gun hating throat in sight".

This is something that has always bewildered me. What do the elites plan to do with the masses of blacks and hispanics when the elites finally have the control that they have lusted for so long?

Do they expect them to magically vanish? I assume that they will try to starve them out, but there are a lot of blacks and browns out there, and they can wreak a lot of havoc before they die out. Who will defend the elites, if the whites have been bred out and wiped out? Do they really think that black, hispanic, and muslim soldiers and police forces will protect them?

Also, what will they do in future years when they need medical treatment? Rich people rarely go into difficult programs such as medicine, so when the white physicians have died or been killed off, where will they get their medical care?

Likewise, where will technological innovation come from? Do they intend to stay at a certain level of technological development and not progress anymore?

Maybe they are counting on the asians to help them in those departments. Good luck with that.

Discard said...

Anon at 7:36 PM: The Left's hatred exceeds their judgement. Right now, killing off the evil White race is the most important thing. They won't get another chance. They'll deal with the aftermath later. It sounds absurd, but what else do you see?
It's not without precedent. In 1941, the Japanese government thought it could beat the United States, and occupy China at the same time. You see, the Japanese had a national myth, a narrative or story line that provided a context that explained things. "Japanese are the best people in the world, by far, and our Japanese spirit will triumph over all enemies." Kamikazes don't beat A-bombs.
All people have these narratives, in which they insert new facts as they come up. In the U.S. today, the multi-cult narrative is the only socially and politically acceptable point of view. There is no place for racial realism in this narrative, so there's no need to address our criticisms. "White people are bad, except we enlightened ones, and we will join with our friends the non-Whites and build a better world." We'll see if a smile will beat a mob of Darks.

Anonymous said...

South Africa is now also a net importer of food.

Anonymous said...

"Little do these ethically compromised morons realize that their Black and Muslim pets will be at the ready to slit every pro-feminist, gay-loving, sexually liberated, gun hating throat in sight".

Yes but they won't be racist when doing so and that is the important point!

Californian said...

What do the elites plan to do with the masses of blacks and hispanics when the elites finally have the control that they have lusted for so long?

This is an interesting point, and one which I would like to see addressed directly to the elites, especially of the globalist variety. Speak "truth to power" and all that sort of thing.

One answer is that the view from the penthouse office is a heck of a lot different from that of the street level. Elites view the great mass of humanity as so much organic material to be manipulated or coerced as needed to maintain elite power.

Via globalism, they are getting what every elite class has wanted since the beginnings of civilization: domination of a world of demoralized quasi-serfs, people with no national consciousness who can be utilized as human capital or disposed of as necessary.

The exploding underclass of third worlders, both migrant and native born, is being used to undermine the middle class. Why? The middle class has been the main threat to the elites historically. Wreck the middle class and elite power is enhanced. To provide the justification, the elites buy off the opinion making class (media, academics, clergy, prestige bloggers) with lots of moneys and lots of foundations to push ideologies such as multicultism.

Look at South Africa. You end white-rule (which we told was a "crime" against humanity), put in black-majority-rule (ah, the victory of "democracy"), and you get a society which, for the average person, is disintegrating into crime, infrastructure collapse, inter-ethnic conflict. But for the elites, the new SA is a society in which resource extraction continues without any pesky protests over apartheid, and the white middle class can be demolished via AA and BEE. As for the black working class? Look at how the ANC government is today sending in the troops against the miners. ( http://mikesmithspoliticalcommentary.blogspot.com/ )

Then again, look at the situation in the first world. The American middle class is allowing itself to be dispossessed by outsourcing, mass third world migration, BRA, whatever. Seen much in the way of protest? A Pat Buchanan might be in the wings, but he is unable to garner mass support.

As for blacks, they might burn down an inner city now and then in protest over something, but this does not translate into serious opposition to the elites. Black generated crime and urban insurrections give elites the excuse to enhance state police powers (while shedding the occasional crocodile tear), and play off the underclass against whites.

Blacks who might lead a serious revolution are co-opted by AA into the system, or marginalized as crazy radicals. Even when blacks are displaced in their jobs and neighborhoods by illegal immigrants, they (or I should say, their leaders) take no political action to oppose this.

The vast majority of citizens do not have a clue. There was an abortive round of protests against globalization a decade or so ago, but that movement has long since been bought off. Even when entire cities are laid waste (ala Detroit), the bread & circuses keep it all in line. In Europa, there is a more direct line of repression, with dissenters being hauled before local inquisitions (ala Geert Wilders). All this is done in the ideological name of "civil rights," "universal humanity," and "kumbaya."

Brave New World, indeed...

Californian said...

On the other hand...

It just may be that the ruling elites of the Western world are not acting rationally. It may be that they are so entranced with the short term advantages of their invade-the-world-invite-the-world strategy that they have lost sight of how it will turn out in the long run, namely their own ruin as well as that of the middle class. There were Roman politicos in the 5th century AD who saw in the barbarian invaders useful allies to be used as muscle against their opponents within the elite stratum of the time. But in the long run, those allies took over the entire show.


Another point to be considered: what if the reason behind globalist policies is that the elites have come to the conclusion that the great majority of first world peoples do not support them? And that all it will take is a mass awakening -- ala the Arab Spring but among White peoples in North America and Europa -- to bring the facade crashing down?

Just thinking out loud...

Discard said...

Californian: We are nobodies trying to make sense of the King's doings up in his castle. We see more than the typical serf, but we're really just guessing. As Voltaire wrote (paraphrased), "Following politics is like being an overnight guest and hearing a pair of silken slippers running up the stairs, followed by a pair of wooden clogs running down, and trying to make sense of it". No doubt there are insiders who read this blog and others, and howl with laughter at our mistaken interpretations.
Given that, I suspect that there are several factions at work, not all of whom hate us. Just as some power-graspers spew the multi-cult line, there are likely others who see the advantage to be had in exploiting White anger to overthrow the current regime. Let the pot boil over and make sure the military stands down, as did the Soviet army 20 years ago, then come in to sort out the wreckage.
Democracy is dead, for now. White autocracy is the best bet for the near future.

Californian said...

We are nobodies trying to make sense of the King's doings up in his castle. We see more than the typical serf, but we're really just guessing.

Good point. It would be interesting to see some insights from within the upper echelons of the Western world.


Given that, I suspect that there are several factions at work, not all of whom hate us.

If so, then there is division among the elites which can be turned into something positive.

Discard said...

Californian: There will always be divisions among the sort of sick turds who are driven to invest all their energies in status displays. The sort of simple humanity that says I'm-an-engineer-and-you're-a-welder-who cares-let's-go-fishing is alien to them. They MUST despise others, and despising your near equals is much more rewarding than despising your obvious inferiors. That accounts for the liberal who hates the White workingman, yet always excuses the ghetto trash. That's why the top fraternity at Ivy League U sneers at the #2 fraternity. And that's why there are bitter rivalries within elite circles, the most status driven assholes of all.

Anonymous said...

The chief goal of the political Left is the extermination of white people and their culture, literally they won't be happy until you're gone. That's why the left has no problem importing retrograde Muslims. As long as they're anti-West and anti-white, as long as they contribute to humiliating whites and breeding them out of existence, they will be supported by the dominant Left. The idea that they are going to let you frustrate their main obsession with little laws or will allow you to starve the machine necessary to reach their goal is naive in the extreme. They've imported (with Stupid Party help) tens of millions of voters to ensure that you can't vote your way out. And there will never again be another conservative Supreme Court member, so the law won't help you either. You'll get nothing but slavery from the system in the future.

Anonymous said...

"Good point. It would be interesting to see some insights from within the upper echelons of the Western world."

Sociopaths with high self-esteem often are quite open about their plans.