Eric,
Thanks for the clarification. Few points I want to address because it really bothers me when White Folks want to sound all Intellictual but clearly misses the point and mostly because they want to or they have gotten all emotional because a non-White is speaking to them in this manner -- like we discuss many times -- who the He** does he think he is anyways. Furthermore, I want Jeremy to see the depth of where his mentality is and probably lots of others are at the same point.
1. "New" residents -- this man wanted to rise the emotions of Whites and depict me as something that I am not. But better attempts have made. At this point in life, I really don't care what folks think who I don't know.
2. "New" residents to equate gentrification -- like I explained before, we all understand the definition as it relates to economics. The difference between African Americans and European Americans is that most (if not all) African Americans with "middle class" money get the plight of Blacks who are oppressed and held hostage to circumstances and get the need for schools, playgrounds, job training, etc. There seems to be an inverse ratio/% of Whites who get it and much rather a dog park.
3. As stated, I love dogs and understand the need for them to run and socialize. But are dog parks a priority over our kids and other needs that it needs to be a budget item now -- in the peril that we are in? Don't think so.
4. As stated, one of my neighbors who I am friendly with her (who is African American) and whose husband is European American, led the charge for a Dog Park over at Langdon -- by the way, most of the other people were European Americans.
I didn't oppose it and am not opposing this one either -- waste of time. Most of the community here had an issue with the choice of the park being in front of The Hospital for Sick Children and even funding it as a priority. The fact is that the govt will do what it takes to satisfy their European American Base in this City -- just like it is doing with the Trolley Barn on our Historic Spingarm's Campus and trying to explain it as "Historic".
In this case, I just wanted to add perspective and level of importance/priority. The mere fact that identifying the priorities of our children, seniors, etc. over the "need" for a dog park led to the
1. Conversation from Ileana of money not affecting other programs says that she doesn't really get that any money being allocated to DOGS is a slap in the face of African Americans who have been fighting for NEEDS of the community for a long time before the influx of such important "NEW Needs of DOGS" and their owners.
2. Then we have Jeremy who felt that he had to clarify that he is a "lifelong" resident of DC of course who just moved to Ward 5 (8 years ago), a business owner, property owner, father because I guess that I mentioned that I was a dog owner.
UNDERSTANDING IMPERIAL PREVILEGE -- this is a mentality that the "haves" innately take over the "have-nots" ALL OVER THE WORLD and germaine to the The United States, it is a overbearing factor in European Americans approach to their rights over others regardless of whether they have or have-not a toenail to eat. That's why in an election for President of United States, which affected the needs of the impoverished, the Vote ratio was what it was -- WHITE PEOPLE are willing to vote against their own needs just so that they would no longer have a Black President. That's the reality of it and Jeremy -- it is in the tone of your opinion. Who am I to tell "New" residents the realistic approach of towing the line as it relates to the importance of Black Kids and the Black Community's needs over DOGS!!! I hear you Bro!!
In my experience (and I have a vast amount of experience with living amongst Whites), most European Americans have that feeling of "better than" and "knowing more" and "knowing what is best for others" and can justify the peanuts that are given to others needs -- kind of that 4 for me, 1 for you equality in sharing proceeds -- like Ward 3 having all of DCPS money/attention over the years compared to other more needed Wards. Maybe that is why George Washington Carver invented 300+ uses of peanuts as he probably only had Peanuts to work with!!!
Follow please:
a. What Jeremy doesn't get is the because I was arguing against the Dog Park being a priority, the assumption would be made that I didn't own a dog, didn't love animals. On the other hand, the assumption of those who are arguing for use of funds for Dog Parks over Children, Seniors, etc. would probably own a dog.
b. The fact that Jeremy added in the rest of garbage of Washingtonion, Property Owner, Business Owner, Lifelong, Father resident says that he feels that all that makes a difference. Well Jeremy, it really doesn't. As a matter of fact, it lends to the fact that He Feels that he has some rights over the "New" residents when it comes to making a statement. Hey buddy -- maybe you missed something -- I had a dog and will have another or two soon, as well as I have a few businesses, a few properties, been in DC long enough -- Ward 5 way over 8 years, have a child who I rather home school because of the HOOPS and Travel that one would have to jump to have her attend a GOOD SCHOOL, and the fact that the depletion of our resources has affected generations and her peers are really not a good influence on her over 180 days, 5 days a week and 8 hours a day -- yet you want me to support DOG PARK over MORE OPPORTUNITY for KIDS and their future -- HE** NO. So, I fight for kids because I would like ALL CHILDREN to have all the benefits and opportunities that I am RUBBING MY KNUKCLES together to provide My Daughter with!! I don't see Jeremy fighting and many other "new" Residents fighting for what rightfully Belongs to our KIDS.
c. The fact that Jeremy feels that he has to educate me about development and the benefits of a "Chinatown" revenue exposes that he feels that others don't have a brain -- and that would lend the same thought process to the rest of the community. REALLY JERAMY -- WE CAN'T SEE HOW BENEFICIAL THAT IS TO THE REST OF THE CITY?? Fact of the matter is -- do you know the tax and other incentives that we gave that we didn't have to because the handwriting was on the wall that the Capital City (Washington DC) was on the move to become the focus of development?? Really DUDE!! Just like they are giving away unnecessary incentives to Rich/Campaign funders that small business owners never get a DRIP of. Just like Living Social -- DC is always on the losing side of funding the Developers because of the Circular Driveway of DC's Money to Campaign funding.
SIDE NOTE -- Which brings me to TOMMY WELLS justifying that there is a difference of Mr. Barry's driving the recipient of contract to the bank and Graham's interference of Lottery Contract. What Tommy Wells doesn't want to share is that when GRAHAM contract has a campaign donation "vehicle" with an AUTOMATIC homing beacon/driver to his campaign funds -- there is absolutely no difference between Mr. Barry and Graham and none with Jack Evans and his purchasing tickets behind home plate with "constituent funds". But when Blacks in Govt. do things, they are quick to differentiate when they should properly equitize the crimes -- But who's keeping tabs!!
d. Then Jeremy Equates more foot traffic (new residents) with having dog parks and reducing crime. Really dude!! We can't have more foot traffic/new residents without having DOG PARKS??
e. Then -- We as "longer time residents" should be so thankful to New Residents for the increased foot traffic that is diminishing crime so they should be upgraded in Priority and be funded for Dog Parks!! Really Dude!!
You see Eric, I hear and see lots more that lay between the words and I am sure many others see it as well. That's why Julianne finally bubbled over the other day, that's why Stephanie R. responds in the manner she does and why Faith let her steam off the other day -- it wasn't just the switching of the plans -- trust me -- it had to do with her overall interaction with DCPS, that school process and all the other BS that is occurring that she sees.
Furthermore, That's why when I infer an optional movement towards and "Uncle Tom", no one objects -- because people are seeing the much of the similar views that I see and the realism of the decisions that are affecting our lives on a "now" basis and proliferating into the future -- like a carry forward of a number -- how in addition a simple carry forward of a "1" really is a 10 -- so when murders, robberies, assaults, etc. occurs due to missing socialization because the misallocation of funding, we shouldn't be surprised.
This is part of the money and investment that has been due our communities for years -- like the "800 acres and 1000 mules" that is owed. Let's not loose site of the benefits of and the tricle down economics from free labor in slavery and double standard, unfair treatment, 3rd class treatment, education with-holding, flawed historical focus, redlining/discriminatory lending, liquor stores on every corner, TV brainwashing, etc that has occurred and now even the dogs are becoming a priority when it comes to allocating funding from taxes. So, if folks decided to start owning horses/ponies, are we not going to provide space for them to roam around??
Still no answer -- what is wrong with a simple inexpensive chain link fence to contain dogs while off leash?? That's a few thousand dollars and it solves for the Dogs -- so this is really about the owners -- which is sad as it shows that they would rather their expensive dog parks -- their version of "22's (rims) on their dog parks(their vehicles) vs. putting the money owed first to our kids towards a better use -- our kids.
So you get it -- most folks who are compassionate towards the needs of our community -- first and foremost our kids, would rather see the investment in kids/infrastructure rather than dog parks and Trolleys. Go figure what Race focuses on What as a Whole. Don't you worry, years from now when the first robbery/murder occurs on the Trolley - while waiting on the Trolley, know that this decision contributed.
Rob Ramson.
PS. And Jeremy, you were right about one thing, -- it really does matter to me -- but it seems like you and others viewpoint of what is more important outweigh mine so this just to be "CLEAR" to you -- we see you putting your dogs over our kids!! I hope I was CLEAR enough.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Eric <ericindc@yahoo.com> wrote:
Just so we are clear here there are a few important points here. The disdain is not for new residents - Rob himself, I believe, hasn't been in DC itself that long, but I think you are missing the overriding point. The issue here is the "common good." Reducing the unemployment rate in this city seems to be better for the city. People can argue that with dog parks and density brings a reduction in crime. But I would argue that if you get folks back to work and get them training programs, you will see a greater reduction in crime where the crime is most prolific.
--- In ward5@yahoogroups.com, Jeremy Gifford wrote:
>
> So lets get this straight. If we build a dog park so The "new" people moving into our neighborhood have a place to take their dog they will be victims of crime? I would submit increasing foot traffic around our neighborhoods has a drastic impact on lowering crime.
>
> Rob, I know you can't see past the hate you have for "new" residents, but is there a possible correlation to "new" residents moving into our neighborhoods that dog parks and children's playgrounds are being built (Ledroit Park for instance)? Increased property, sales, and income taxes are needed to pay for these things.
>
> I understand that you do not want to give "new" residents what they desire in the hope that they will leave, but look at China Town as a prime example. Before the Verizon center was built China Town was a dump, at the age of 13 I went there to look at prostitutes! The city spent money, Abe Pollin spent money, and now the entire city benefits from the tax dollars it creates. If you don't provide amenities to people they aren't going to stay in the city..... Aaaahhhh I see now. That's really what you want.
>
> Well with it go their tax dollars, exactly what we need to make our schools better for our children. You can't have it both ways Rob, you need tax revenue to pay for things you want. Taxes don't come out of thin air, you need more people and more people spending money to get more taxes.
>
> And since it seems to matter to you
>
> Jeremy
> Life time Washingtonian
> Father
> Dog Owner
> Business Owner
> Property Owner
> A "New" ward 5 resident 8 years ago
>
>
>> On Mar 5, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Rob wrote:
>
> > Hello Ileana,
> >
> > Let me just say -- with all the priorities in hand, NO MONEY should be allocated to Dog Parks when a simple fence could suffice if there is a concern of dogs running off of a leash!!
> >
> > Any money allocated to Dog Parks by the Mayor is taking away from where the money could be put.
> >
> > As to the last couple of years of zero money to dog parks -- well dogs only really just started having those "needs".
> >
> > So you really get it, I don't have different "needs". My dog just died and I just had the discussion with my sister to get one of her 3 Akitas (she has 4 dogs and a cat) or to get one/two of her next set of pups. By the way, I have 3 cats as well.
> >
> > So, if you read my emails thoroughly, you would understand that PRIORITIES does not mean eliminating. I am Strongly suggesting that you and the rest of those who want the City to pay for your Dogs to run around should really TOW the line way behind THE NEEDS OF OUR KIDS. If you don't listen, those same kids that you negligently re-allocate their playground/education Money from will Rob/Burgularize/Assault you.
> >
> > Pay attention -- every child who we reach and provide lowers the Crime Rate and increases Taxes. Take your dog over to a friend's house or put up a inexpensive chainlink fence if needed. Jesus Christ -- this is not rocket science.
> >
> > If you haven't figured it by now, I am not easily nudged of LOGIC. And by the way, there has been dog parks build over the last Several years -- one spearheaded by a Black Neighbor/Friend of Mine.
> >
> > More than likely, most if not all of those who are fighting for Dog Parks just arrived here and you should understand others have been vested in this City log before you and NEEDS must come first or it is deemed as selfish.
> >
> > So you get it, the "walking/running "Track" around Turkey Thicket's Baseball field needs to be upgraded so as our feet do not hurt after walking/running on that bumpy surface -- Should your dogs be more important than my feet and how I feel? Our Seniors need Equiptment for their aging bodies to stay healthy, should their pain continue to persist because you want your dogs to have a park? I can continue until you get where dogs and their needs are on the food chain.
> >
> > Now if this is about you -- purchase where your dog has the ability to run around -- let that be part of the equation that your decision to rent or purchase is based upon. Like I said before, when you move into a city, it is like marrying into a family -- you are now a part of and the priorities in this city are our KIDS NEEDS.
> >
> > Rob Ramson.
> >
> > Rob Ramson
> >> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:30 AM, ileana schinder wrote:
> >>
> >> Rob et al,
> >> The proposal of a dog park at Harry Thomas Sr Rec Center does NOT take money from any other city services. (there is no money allocated for a dog park right now, actually).
> >> So there is no money taken away from education, social services or other vital services to make room for dogs. When the mayor designates a chunk of money to be spent on a dog park, then that money MUST be spent on a dog park and cannot be moved to other expenses. For the last serveral years the dog park expense has been zero. So the lack of services that you mention are not to be blamed to dogs (or their owners) but choices that the administration and goverment officials make.
> >> Please let's not pile on citizens that may have needs different from yours. The city is a matter of balancing the needs and wants of its citizens.
> >> ile
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > R. Ramson
> > 3744 12th Street, N.E.,
> > Washington D.C., 20017
> > 202-438-5988
> >
> > "We must become the change we want to see" - Mohandas Gandhi-
> > (Together, for a Brighter Tomorrow)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4) To Post a message, send it to: ward5@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: ward5-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
.
__,_._,___
--
R. Ramson
3744 12th Street, N.E.,
Washington D.C., 20017
202-438-5988
"We must become the change we want to see" - Mohandas Gandhi-
(Together, for a Brighter Tomorrow)
--
--
WardFive@googlegroups.com is open to WardFive residents for community discussion and information sharing.
To post to this group, send email to wardfive@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wardfive+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wardfive?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WardFive" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wardfive+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment