Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
NYT Editorial Board: ‘Blue States Are the Problem’
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but the New York Times Editorial Board is making sense. Democrats blame every problem in America on evil Republicans standing in the way of their compassionate progressive vision. If only Democrats controlled everything, a liberal paradise would emerge, showing equity, education, and enlightenment from sea to shining sea.
So NYT videographer Johnny Harris and Editorial Board member Binyamin Appelbaum looked at the results of long-time, one-party Democratic rule in the bluest of blue states. The results won’t surprise conservatives, but will amazing right-thinking lefties everywhere. Watch this video:
“What we’re talking about here is that blue states are the problem,” Appelbaum says. “Blue states are where the housing crisis is located. Blue states are where the disparities in education funding are the most dramatic. Blue states are the places where tens of thousands of homeless people are living on the streets. Blue states are the places where economic inequality is increasing most quickly in this country.”
Just so.
Harris adds that “affluent liberals tend to be really good at showing up to the marches and talking about how they love equality. They’re really good at putting signs in their lawns saying that ‘all are welcome here.’ But by their actions, what they’re actually saying is, yes, we believe in these ideals, just not in my backyard.”
If the Times wants to dig deeper into this reality, perhaps they should read everything Thomas Sowell ever wrote.
Published in General
Harris, is an independent YouTube journalist. (Unless this just changed just recently?)He is not on their staff. The fact that the NYT allowed this more likely has to due with their friendship with him than anything. He is hit or miss. To often he will due a piece that is really just reashing a book and that is the only research he does. He make it sound like he did his own independent research and not just use the book. ( his piece on the reason for the Iraq war is prime example. He took lies in a book the national reviewe proved to be false and claimed it actually happened) When he does his own independent research from mutile sources, that is when he is good.
Because liberalism goes against basic human nature. Sadly, that is not the conclusion he draws. Instead he argues that liberals need to be even more liberal. More progressive taxes to punish the people who generate wealth. Housing equality by making nice neighborhoods less nice. If liberals don’t practice what they preach it is sign that, even if they won’t admit it, they know their policies are bad.
Looking at the comments on the Facebook post where they shared this video, the Democrats are quick to point out it’s not a D vs R issues, it’s a Marxist class issue: Rich vs Poor. Oh and racism of course. And as Kevin Williamson likes to point out: the Dems are the party of the rich.
PS, I love the videos of liberal city councils essentially saying “we love affordable housing but we can’t have it here because poor minorities will move in”. Now that’s RICH!
Democrats are the party of the permanent bureaucracy
Not all blue states are welcoming. Twice that I know of, Cuomo stated that conservatives were not welcome in NY. True, he’s gone now for “me too” issues, but still . . .
And what is with the assumption that funding correlates with educational outcomes? Wasn’t that disproven long ago in Kansas City or somewhere?
Just looked around the interwebs and you are correct, sir. Apologies!
I won’t complain, but it has a bit of the “problem with communism is that it’s never been tried” vibe to it.
He should explore why red states are successful.
Funny how those SALT deductions keep on showing up in the Democrat spending bills too.
Was refreshing to see people on their own side call themselves out like that.
I think a return to ‘Federalism’ and local control could really ease tensions in the United States.
Yeah, the complaints of the two guys aren’t that progressive policies don’t work, it is that progressives aren’t following those policies. I half agree with them on the topic of housing, though. I do not want the government building low-cost housing, as they do. But I do find it objectionable how zoning laws forbid the building of apartment buildings, even small units like duplexes.
I think we would all agree that it is greedy when a small-town businessman asks his friend the mayor or city council member to forbid a competing business from opening up in town. I’ve seen this sort of thing with a local restaurant owner, and a friend told me how the owner of all the gas stations in her town has political friends that keep anyone else from opening a gas station. So if that sort of behavior is corrupt and works against our free market ideals, is it not the same thing when home owners vote for zoning laws that will perpetuate a housing shortage, thus keeping the price of their house sky high?
Yeah, and why is it always that high density housing is the answer? Yes, we know (eyeroll) single family homes are evil, sprawl, ticky-tack, yada, yada, yada…
Much of Jerry Brown’s “elegant density” was coming online when we left Oakland last year. There are always stipulations on affordable housing in every development mix and there never seemed to be a shortage of section 8 housing near my old ‘hood. Real estate was still crazy, homelessness rampant, crime was on the rise, the schools were in danger of state oversight (again) and traffic was getting worse.
Cities can do some of these “right” things mentioned in the video and still fail by insisting on stuff like implementing road diets/bike lanes in a growing city and doubling down on more stupid.
Funny, corporate media will not call these tax cuts for the rich