Skip to main content

Blight: More Government "Solutions" to Government-Created Problems


The subject of blight has nearly become ubiquitous in the wake of the dilapidation of cities such as Detroit and Baltimore. One topic which has recently entered the theater of the newsroom has been the restoration of these cities. NPR’s podcast “Planet Money” covers this topic with a charismatic investigation into the specific case of the 900 block in the city of Baltimore. 

This podcast, entitled “Unbuilding A City,” specifically highlights a federal law known as the Uniform Act, which was passed in 1970 to establish “minimum standards for federally funded programs and projects that [either] require the acquisition of real property (real estate) or displace persons from their homes, businesses, or farms. The Uniform Act's protections and assistance apply to the acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition of real property for federal or federally funded projects.” 

This act was originally intended to afford reasonable accommodations for those individuals whose real property fell victim to so-called eminent domain, whereby the federal government would compensate individuals for their displacement in favor of constructing such public utilities as highways and railroads. Nowhere within the specific letter of eminent domain will one find any provision for the redevelopment of lands or real property which has purely become an eyesore along the commuter's route.  

Unfortunately, NPR does here what it often seems inclined to do and grips this law, a well-groomed storyline and a presumptuous philosophical position on social responsibility and twists them in favor of a political agenda, glossing over the intended purpose of that law and, in classic NPR style, starting in the middle of the story instead of seriously investigating the causes of this neighborhood’s decline and determining how that law even applies or whether it even ought to apply. 

The cast at “Planet Money” exploits a local African-American woman of anonymous identity and background, beyond her name and claimed neighborhood rank, to capitalize on the moral, ethical appetites of their aural audience members, who might otherwise possess the economic or political curiosity to question the very policy and attending funds which here serve to enable the displacement of this woman who has supposedly spearheaded her own mission against drug deals and gang-related activity in the area which consequentially follows from a syllabus of other factors conveniently not mentioned in the podcast, including the risky nature of the War on Drugs, the hiring disincentives carried out by the welfare state and the nationwide destruction of industry, resourcefulness and personal responsibility which first drove such American cities as Detroit to achieve a type of wealth and widespread productivity that the world had never seen. 

Whom am I trying to kid, though? These are NPR listeners, not serious economists. In the end, the hardened position of blight-elimination is cemented by an unquestioning dive into a special, shortsighted plight of an individual whose previous, more intimate life and attending preferences go largely unknown or untested by this so-called investigation, all while an entire block in Baltimore has been wiped from the planet without any consideration for the potential gains or losses, whether direct or residual, exacted upon the city, let alone the safe-haven status which may have been otherwise enjoyed by transients or low-income persons with low-level preferences and a mere will to survive, all to make way for an aesthetically-pleasing park posing as eye candy for hipsters and occasional passerby. 

Of course, this park has yet to be realized, unlike the $800,000 price-tag of taxpayer-funded demolition, let alone the supplemental outlays afforded to this lone African-American victim of literary convenience and others like her whose stories go neatly summarized for podcast format and whose broader context would only cause a Neo-style nausea which may compel the listener to question whether life has any truth to it. That is, of course, if the listener can even retain any of the material or any curiosities long enough before jumping into the next stanza of podcast poetry. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

The Keynesian mantra, in its implications, has its roots in destruction rather than truth: “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your guiding principle, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. While it is true that our fates intersect in death, that does not mean that we ought to condemn our heirs to that view: the view that our work on this planet ought only to serve ourselves, and that we ought only to bear in mind the consequences within our own lifetimes.  The Keynesians, of course, prefer their outlook, as it serves their interests; it has the further benefit of appealing to other selfish people who have little interest in the future to which they'll ultimately condemn their heirs. After all, they'll be long gone by then. So, in the Keynesian view, the longterm prospects for the common currency, social stability, and personal liberty are not just irrelevant but inconvenient. In their view, regardless of the consequences, those in charge tod

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. It was a war whose total cost, including pensions and the burial of veterans, was an estimated $12 billion. Likewise, it was a war that would

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes. In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes. It doesn't stop there. In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes. But guess what! It doesn't stop there. No, no, no, no.  In California, there's always another tax. After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda. The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes