PDA

View Full Version : "Africa Town" in Detroit



TexasTiny
25 September 2004, 10:24 PM
http://www.freep.com/news/locway/detplan21...1e_20040921.htm (http://www.freep.com/news/locway/detplan21e_20040921.htm)

Detroit council OKs plan that touts racial separation

September 21, 2004

BY MARISOL BELLO
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

A majority of the Detroit City Council wants to implement an economic development plan it commissioned for $112,000 that preaches racial isolation and rails against immigration in its bid to gain economic success for poor blacks.

The crux of the plan is the creation of a business district -- dubbed African Town -- that would be funded in part with city money and made up of black-owned businesses catering to a black clientele.

The report also complains that immigrants from Mexico, Asia and the Middle East are stealing resources, jobs and other opportunities from blacks and calls on city leaders to stop the economic shift.

The report does not call on the city to stop immigration -- and the city wouldn't have any power to stop it, even if it wanted to -- but the report does call on the city to level the playing field between blacks and the newcomers who it says are economically surpassing them.

"We see this as another compliment to the exciting development going on in the city," said Councilwoman JoAnn Watson, who introduced the effort to the council earlier this summer. The plan is under scrutiny by some city leaders and economic development experts who question the legality of an effort meant to help only one race. Some officials decry the council's efforts as threatening to reverse strides made in the region to improve race relations and the city's relationship with its neighbors.

Such a plan also could further alienate efforts by Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick to seek regional cooperation and funding for major projects, such as an expansion and renovation of Cobo Center.

One official calls it outright racist.

"It's reverse racism," said Kay Everett, one of two councilwomen who voted against the plan. The other council member who rejected the plan was Sheila Cockrel.

"This is foolish," Everett said. "They don't understand. They're not thinking of the city as a whole. We need to bring harmony to this city, and if we say that we do not want any other people here, then we're being racist."

Council members who voted for the plan are quick to say they are not against immigrants. They say the city must act to help blacks, who more than any other ethnic group in the United States suffer from high levels of poverty, unemployment and school dropout rates.

Kilpatrick vetoed efforts by the council in July to implement the plan, but last week the mayor met with the plan's creator, Claud Anderson, a former Detroiter who had unsuccessfully applied for a casino license. He is also the author of popular books about the economic state of blacks in the country.

Kilpatrick officials said they did not sign any agreements with Anderson, but they are working to help him find land for a business district. So far, they have been unsuccessful.

A mayoral spokesman said that while the meetings were not an endorsement of the politics behind Anderson's plans, the mayor sees merit in the portions of the plan that are focused on creating jobs and increasing the number of black-owned businesses in the city.

"As they do with any potential investors, the mayor and his development team will continue to evaluate any economic development proposal presented to the city as part of its ongoing efforts to grow Detroit," said mayoral spokesman Howard Hughey.

"This administration is committed to improving the social and economic conditions, not only of African Americans, but also other traditionally disadvantaged groups."

He said the administration is against the council's efforts to institutionalize a system that only helps blacks to the exclusion of other races. The council will find it difficult to implement its plan without the mayor's approval.

The report, "A Powernomics Economic Development Plan for Detroit's Under-Served Majority Population," says inner cities should be improved for its residents, who should own and control the businesses in their neighborhoods. He calls on blacks to support black-owned businesses, in the same way he says other groups frequent stores owned by people of their own ethnicities.

The report also says integration has failed blacks and that regionalism is a bid by whites to control the city's resources. Anderson warns city leaders to beware of non-blacks moving into the city because they will have their own agendas.

Anderson says his theories are not racist, but they are honest.

He said the city is bordering on an economic crisis, with 26 percent of the city's population living below the poverty line.

"The biggest problem in the city of Detroit -- and it's true of all urban areas -- are black leaders and white leaders who continue to use and hide behind the myth of a color-blind and race-neutral society and use it as an excuse not to deal with this dilemma," Anderson said.

"There are special problems unique to black folks, and the city needs to address their problems."

Detroit is the first city to begin to implement his Powernomics philosophy, Anderson said. He wants to create a business district for blacks, like Mexicantown or Greektown, that would include a fish factory with its own hatchery, black hair-care supplier, popcorn factory and fruit juice producers.

He said he has some investors lined up to help with such a project, but he would not reveal their names.

The executive director of the Initiative for a Competitive Inner City, a Boston-based nonprofit created by a Harvard University business professor, said the council is right to want to implement a plan to help blacks become entrepreneurs. But the director, Anne Habiby, said black-business ownership is not a panacea, especially if there are no plans in place to help the business owners succeed. The initiative is in talks with Detroit to work as a consultant on economic development issues.

Habiby said Detroit has suffered so much population loss that its future success depends on more people moving into the city.

"Detroit must be an attractive place for people to live," Habiby said. "It's shortsighted for city leaders to create an environment that feels unwelcoming."

Activists in the Hispanic and Arab communities say the city should work to help African Americans, but they said they worry that if the plan is seen as a race-based solution, it may deepen rifts between ethnic groups.

"I do think it's the city leadership's duty to work with the community and no doubt, the priority is African Americans," said Imad Hamad, Michigan director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. "We have to go by the makeup of the community. ... My concern here is that it depends how people read it or react to it."

One Hispanic business leader said the city should open its doors to all ethnic groups. She said the Mexican community has been part of the city since the early 1900s. Hispanics account for 5 percent of the city's population.

"There's a lot going on in the city of Detroit, and if there is a need for an African Town, go for it," said Maria Elena Rodriguez, president of the Mexicantown Community Development Corporation. "But we should not be knocked for trying to get a seat at the table."

And John Carroll, who heads the Detroit Regional Chamber of Commerce, said like it or not, the city and the suburbs are tied together.

"We think it's not a good option to pursue," he said.

But seven of nine council members did. They voted in July to begin implementing parts of Anderson's plan, including a resolution that designates blacks, who make up 83 percent of Detroit's population, as the "majority minority" group and another that creates a development corporation that would operate as a loan fund exclusively for black entrepreneurs.

The mayor vetoed both resolutions, but the same council members overrode the veto.

Councilwoman Cockrel, who supported the mayor's veto, said: "I'm not prepared to support an economic development strategy that has the unintended consequences of pitting people against each other. At the end of the day ... the plan ... advocates exclusionary classifications and illegal set-asides that only serve to divide and polarize within the city and the region. And we have plenty of that already.

JSteffen
25 September 2004, 10:59 PM
Ugg.... Detroit.... There are so many names we had for it when I lived in Michigan.... None I can say w/o this post getting deleated.... No one there wants to help themselves.... The only city I can think of that might contend as the worst city is Flint, MI, the only city in the country to go bankrupt.... HOW DOES A CITY GO BANKRUPT, I dont understand they have a city income tax....

Both #1 and #2 in violent crimes in the US...

Man of Leisure
25 September 2004, 11:31 PM
anrupt
Ugg.... Detroit.... There are so many names we had for it when I lived in Michigan.... None I can say w/o this post getting deleated.... No one there wants to help themselves.... The only city I can think of that might contend as the worst city is Flint, MI, the only city in the country to go bankrupt.... HOW DOES A CITY GO BANKRUPT, I dont understand they have a city income tax....

Both #1 and #2 in violent crimes in the US...
Hmmmm.....what about San Diego?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/business/article/0,1299,DRMN_4_3208478,00.html

TexasTiny
26 September 2004, 10:40 PM
Ugg.... Detroit.... There are so many names we had for it when I lived in Michigan.... None I can say w/o this post getting deleated.... No one there wants to help themselves.... The only city I can think of that might contend as the worst city is Flint, MI, the only city in the country to go bankrupt.... HOW DOES A CITY GO BANKRUPT, I dont understand they have a city income tax....

Both #1 and #2 in violent crimes in the US...

How are you going to have "Africa Town" with no Africans?

psukhu
27 September 2004, 01:40 AM
New York City went bankrupt in the 70's. The Feds bailed them out and put them on a payment plan. They are still paying back that loan today.


The report also complains that immigrants from Mexico, Asia and the Middle East are stealing resources, jobs and other opportunities from blacks and calls on city leaders to stop the economic shift.

If you were born in the US, how can someone who speaks English as a second language steal your job?

freewaytincan
27 September 2004, 02:43 AM
New York City went bankrupt in the 70's. The Feds bailed them out and put them on a payment plan. They are still paying back that loan today.



If you were born in the US, how can someone who speaks English as a second language steal your job?

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/immigrant.gif

tamtagon
27 September 2004, 03:32 AM
A majority of the Detroit City Council wants to implement an economic development plan it commissioned for $112,000....

Claud Anderson, a former Detroiter who had unsuccessfully applied for a casino license.

He is also the author of popular books about the economic state of blacks in the country.

Detroit is the first city to begin to implement his Powernomics philosophy, Anderson said. He wants to create a business district for blacks, like Mexicantown or Greektown, that would include a fish factory with its own hatchery, black hair-care supplier, popcorn factory and fruit juice producers.

He said he has some investors lined up to help with such a project, but he would not reveal their names.



Of course these statements are out of context, but I smell a rat.


They voted in July to begin implementing parts of Anderson's plan, including a resolution that designates blacks, who make up 83 percent of Detroit's population, as the "majority minority" group and another that creates a development corporation that would operate as a loan fund exclusively for black entrepreneurs.

If it is reported that 83% of the city population is black, it needs to be reported what percentage of Detroit business are currently owned by blacks.

hamiltonpl
27 September 2004, 07:24 PM
Replace "Black" with "White" and "African" with "European" and you have the racist system that existed in our country just 30 years ago. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

If private business owners want to make an "Africa Town" they should go right ahead and do it. But the city giving financial incentives to only benefit the majority race is as racist as you can get.

dallastophoenix
27 September 2004, 07:57 PM
Africa Town?????? from rust belt to racist belt - this is going to backfire...

Geaux Tigers
27 September 2004, 09:01 PM
Why do I get the feeling that if this were happening in Jackson, MS or Birmingham, AL and the name was "Whiteville" or "Eurotown", this would be national news?

freewaytincan
27 September 2004, 10:47 PM
Why do I get the feeling that if this were happening in Jackson, MS or Birmingham, AL and the name was "Whiteville" or "Eurotown", this would be national news?

Naturally.

HarryMoto
28 September 2004, 04:50 AM
Ugg.... Detroit.... There are so many names we had for it when I lived in Michigan.... None I can say w/o this post getting deleated.... No one there wants to help themselves.... The only city I can think of that might contend as the worst city is Flint, MI, the only city in the country to go bankrupt.... HOW DOES A CITY GO BANKRUPT, I dont understand they have a city income tax....

Both #1 and #2 in violent crimes in the US...


If you were born in the US, how can someone who speaks English as a second language steal your job?

It's interesting that everyone gets all superior and hops on their high horse when it comes to Detroit. It's kind of like watching reality TV or hookers on Jerry Springer, it's nice to have someone to look down on because it makes you feel better. But Detroit, despite its national image, didn't just blossom in a vacuum as a city brimming with irrational, angry blacks. Don't get me wrong. This Africa Town is a regressive, bad idea but the essence of the discontent expressed has been with this country for 400 years.

When I was growing up in Los Angeles, I think it's safe to say most car wash workers, garbage men, hotel/airport/train porters, city sanitation workers, lower-rung hospital workers, etc., were black. That's certainly not the case today. Obviously, a large segment of the black population has moved from working to middle class and a smaller amount to upperclass, but another segment has not and this is the segment that fears immigration and displacement -- just as the white working class feared black workers and immigrants in the early part of the 20th century. Those at the bottom of the ladder have always feared being replaced by someone who will "work cheaper." There's nothing new here.

As far as city governments actively sponsoring ethnic "towns" within cities, I'm not so sure that this is the first time it's happened. Ethnic and other special interest groups have always used the power of city hall to help their own. That doesn't make it right but, again, it's nothing new. Many years ago, the city of Miami wanted to "create" a Chinatown. Nothing came of it (you still can't get decent Chinese food in Miami) but that would have been an artificially created "ethnic" town -- I'm sure full of all sorts of tax breaks and what not -- and, if it had been put into action, I doubt it would have caused this wave of free-market caterwauling and outrage being vented here.

What language one was born speaking is immaterial. Many American-born black kids in this country -- isolated from the currents of economic prosperity, battling to stay afloat with inferior education and little guidance -- are less equipped to deal with getting ahead than their "competition" from abroad who often come here with a better grounding in the basics (and are bilingual to boot). This is true within the black community as a rift has surfaced between African/Caribbean-born blacks and American-born blacks as the former are doing better economically. So it's not just a color thing.

(However, there are conspiracy theorists in the black community who feel all of this is deliberate, that black people are slowly being made expendable. For example, they ask why corporations would trek all the way to India to set up call centers and employ thousands when, for example, they could do it in inner-city Detroit with people who speak English and wouldn't have to go to a class to learn about "The Apprentice" or basketball in order to make small talk with angry Americans who got overcharged on their AMEX bill. I'm not saying I agree with this but it would be interesting if a company decided to treat impovershed black America as if it were another country.)

Detroit, moreso than even other rust-belt cities, was subjected to a massive exodus of its middle class (black and white) in the '60s and '70s, convulsive race riots, and a phenomenal shrinking of its tax base with the shuttering of much of the auto industry. That it has survived as well as it has -- and now has a semi-progressive mayor who seems to want to heal the wounds of the past, some apparently are returning to the city, and idiot activities like Devils Night are disappearing -- is actually miraculous. Of course, there will be retrogrades, such as the Africa Town proponents, who see the world through the prism of race-based solutions and history probably will prove them wrong. However, I find the sanctimonious glee and high-handedness evoked here and elsewhere when something wrong-headed happens in Detroit just a little bit disturbing.

Besides, Detroit techno -- one of the most vibrant, intriguing and overlooked (by Americans) musical scenes to come out of this country in the last 20 years (black kids with synthesizers, influenced by Kraftwerk, John Cage and the classical avant-garde, and the B-52's. Who knew?) -- rules. The annual festival in Detroit attracts something like 100,000 people, many coming from England, continental Europe and Japan. But I'm sure you guys already know that. :)

drumguy8800
28 September 2004, 05:27 AM
There's a Thai-town in LA, Little Mexico's across the map, Little Italy, Chinatowns, Greektowns.. bah blah, etc.. what's wrong with an Africa Town?

Dallas has a minority and women's business thing.. that always was annoying to me. along with colleges meeting diversity quotas.. blah...

maybe its bad to try and 'hatch' a cultural area. Thai-town was dubbed so after the Thai's moved in. The city didn't pick a spot and say "hey, you! move here!.." the thing just happened.

I wish Dallas had areas named this. We have other names, although they just might serve the same purpose. "Inner-ring" means Hispanic, "Oak Cliff" means African-descent.. parts of Richardson, Carrollton, Plano, and Irving are home to the majority of the area's Indians and Southeast Asians.. and our outerburbs are mostly caucasian. There are plenty of non-caucasians living in the suburbs, but an overrwhelming majority (70% and up) definetly classifies them as predominately european.

I remember someone calling the area near Pike Park "Little Mexico"...

Geaux Tigers
28 September 2004, 11:32 AM
There's a Thai-town in LA, Little Mexico's across the map, Little Italy, Chinatowns, Greektowns.. bah blah, etc.. what's wrong with an Africa Town?

Dallas has a minority and women's business thing.. that always was annoying to me. along with colleges meeting diversity quotas.. blah...

maybe its bad to try and 'hatch' a cultural area. Thai-town was dubbed so after the Thai's moved in. The city didn't pick a spot and say "hey, you! move here!.." the thing just happened.

I wish Dallas had areas named this. We have other names, although they just might serve the same purpose. "Inner-ring" means Hispanic, "Oak Cliff" means African-descent.. parts of Richardson, Carrollton, Plano, and Irving are home to the majority of the area's Indians and Southeast Asians.. and our outerburbs are mostly caucasian. There are plenty of non-caucasians living in the suburbs, but an overrwhelming majority (70% and up) definetly classifies them as predominately european.

I remember someone calling the area near Pike Park "Little Mexico"...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd say the biggest difference would be the fact that these other "cultural" neighborhoods are not government sponsered and aren't receiving tax breaks as this area in Detroit would.

tamtagon
28 September 2004, 12:17 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd say the biggest difference would be the fact that these other "cultural" neighborhoods are not government sponsered and aren't receiving tax breaks as this area in Detroit would.

You're right GT, Detroit is not trying to hatch a geographic focal point for the black culture. Most evidence already points to a very strong "black" culture in Detroit.

The most dubious part of it all, to me, is that the city paid $112,000 for a plan from an individual noted for his "popular books about the economic state of blacks in the country." Futhermore, "A Powernomics Economic Development Plan for Detroit's Under-Served Majority Population" seems to benefit the author of the plan more than anyone as the city previously had been "working to help him find land for a business district" without success until the community based plan sees some action. This is another example of the need for a separation of Business and State. I do not believe any level of government should participate in activities intended to spur job growth. The govt's fundamental role is to make sure people are not getting hurt, cheated or neglected.

Mballar
28 September 2004, 05:30 PM
This is another example of the need for a separation of Business and State. I do not believe any level of government should participate in activities intended to spur job growth. The govt's fundamental role is to make sure people are not getting hurt, cheated or neglected.

not when the government oversees a capitalist economy! and what about the flip-side of that? . . Do you think that the government should participate in activities intended to stem job losses/ (ie. bailout of Airline Industry)

Geaux Tigers
28 September 2004, 05:37 PM
not when the government oversees a capitalist economy! and what about the flip-side of that? . . Do you think that the government should participate in activities intended to stem job losses/ (ie. bailout of Airline Industry)
No. I don't think it's the taxpayer's responsiblity to bailout airlines because they can't seem to manage a profit. I don't see the Federal Reserve spotting me a few bucks when I'm a little short!

drumguy8800
28 September 2004, 06:04 PM
10 out 10 terrorists agree: vote Kerry/Edwards 2004!!

10 out 10 is very bad grammar. How fitting.

Did Bush say it?

mikedsjr
28 September 2004, 07:05 PM
I think that there are reasons for why company's and cities are bailed out that benefit the country. But every situation has to be looked at as its own case.

"AfricaTown" in some ways sounds cool. I'm hoping they have lots of Zebras and Elephants roaming around. They will have to give the police the extra job of watching for poachers though.

Geaux Tigers
28 September 2004, 07:38 PM
10 out 10 is very bad grammar. How fitting.

Did Bush say it?
You like that?? :D No, I actually saw it on a bumper sticker yesterday. It sounded cool until my f**ked up typing got a hold of it.

Anyway, maybe they could also add a few lion prides, malaria-ridden mosquitos, an AIDS epidemic, and bands of machine gun toating rebels to "Africa Town" for the "just like the real thing" experience.

tamtagon
28 September 2004, 11:51 PM
Do you think that the government should participate in activities intended to stem job losses/ (ie. bailout of Airline Industry)

No, in theory, I dont think the government should bailout an industry or a major player in an industry; however, the current relationship between our govt and our industries requires the government to provide a corporate version of the student loan.

The government's role should be establishing, managing and enforcing the rules of business within the economy. Some of these "rules" of self governance would require corrective measures well before an industry or major player in an industry was facing bankruptcy.

Mballar
29 September 2004, 10:33 AM
No, in theory, I dont think the government should bailout an industry or a major player in an industry; however, the current relationship between our govt and our industries requires the government to provide a corporate version of the student loan.

The government's role should be establishing, managing and enforcing the rules of business within the economy. Some of these "rules" of self governance would require corrective measures well before an industry or major player in an industry was facing bankruptcy.


No. I don't think it's the taxpayer's responsiblity to bailout airlines because they can't seem to manage a profit. I don't see the Federal Reserve spotting me a few bucks when I'm a little short!


I think that there are reasons for why company's and cities are bailed out that benefit the country. But every situation has to be looked at as its own case.

The question doesn't turn on whether the government should bail out a certain industry, that was just used as an example; And in lieu of your comments, I now think that using the airline industry bailout as an example was a bad idea. What the question does turn on is whether the government should participate in activities that stem job loss. Maybe the "outsourcing" of jobs in this country is a better example to utilize in my question?

and btw, I was asking a rhetorical question in response to tamtagon's comment below:



This is another example of the need for a separation of Business and State. I do not believe any level of government should participate in activities intended to spur job growth. The govt's fundamental role is to make sure people are not getting hurt, cheated or neglected.

tamtagon
29 September 2004, 12:00 PM
Maybe the "outsourcing" of jobs in this country is a better example to utilize in my question?

and btw, I was asking a rhetorical question in response to tamtagon's comment below:

I'd have to say that most conversations about what our government should do versus what our government does do is going to involve a lot of wild goose chases. The government is so big, I dont think anyone really knows what is supposed to be happening, and personally, if we keep going at it like we have for the past couple decades, we should just go ahead and admit to ourselves that we've got a Socialist government.

As far as the current outsourcing, there is not much the govt can do. Just like 20-30 years ago when manufacturing job growth in Asia put people in America out of work, the same thing is happening today. When industries cannot afford American Labor costs, the current government has two choices - float the susptible industry with cash (through business tax discounts or proped up prices via import tarrifs), or let the low paying jobs leave the country and re-educate the American workforce.

Either way, the American consumers lose. The government's duty to the citizens is to reward businesses which anticipate each job segment exodus, and prompt the business community to macro-manage the whole process so the movement of jobs does not shock the economy - of either country, the one losing jobs, and the one gaining jobs.

Anyway, I could go on and on and on but wont. :)

JaeTex
29 September 2004, 03:00 PM
Either way, the American consumers lose.

Actually the American "consumer" is the winner. The American "worker" as a consumer is also a winner. He gets the same product at a lower price. Now the particular American worker who no longer has a job making whatever loses, and loses even more if he can't learn to do something else.

But other than unemployment benefits and the like it's probably not a good idea to take extraordinary measures to save that job. I mean when the car became popular did the government give big handouts to the folks who made buggy-whips just so they wouldn't be out of a job? No. And while it becomes a more sensitive issue when we talk about jobs moving out of the country (or if you're a yankee, when we talk about jobs moving south) it doesn't really change the dynamics.

tamtagon
29 September 2004, 03:34 PM
Actually the American "consumer" is the winner. The American "worker" as a consumer is also a winner. He gets the same product at a lower price. Now the particular American worker who no longer has a job making whatever loses, and loses even more if he can't learn to do something else.

But other than unemployment benefits and the like it's probably not a good idea to take extraordinary measures to save that job. I mean when the car became popular did the government give big handouts to the folks who made buggy-whips just so they wouldn't be out of a job? No. And while it becomes a more sensitive issue when we talk about jobs moving out of the country (or if you're a yankee, when we talk about jobs moving south) it doesn't really change the dynamics.

I should have taken the time to be more clear, and I agree that should not try to keep American workers performing tasks at an overvalued salary. If the government participates in activities that stem job loss, the consumer is the loser. For the govt to create conditions in which companies across an industry are able to employee American workers and make a profit, either the product price is inflated above its value, or - even worse - tax revenue is the tool balancing P&L reports of product providers.

If the govt is going to directly participate in the economy, then the govt should provide tools and objective leadership to identify the tasks performed in our country which a free market would naturally exported to workers in other countries. In fact, our government should work with other govts to facilitate a balanced transfer of tasks unprofitablly performed in America (due the a higher cost) which will increase the standard of living in the other country - on our terms with regard to working conditions.

Our workforce is constantly educated and trained for "higher level" duties before/while the jobs leave, the workforce taking over the jobs are educated and trained before/while the jobs arrive.

Mballar
29 September 2004, 03:56 PM
tamtagon and Jae Tex, your comments appear to suggest that there are no people living in this country that are willing to perform those same jobs for less pay. . . Now that I think about it, I would bet that some of the people currently holding those jobs would perform them for less pay, if faced with the alternative of Unemployment. I read stories all the time about people loosing their jobs and going to work somewhere else where they make upwards of 45% less than what they were making.

The next question then becomes "Whether the government should impose a minimum wage in this country?"

tamtagon
29 September 2004, 04:13 PM
tamtagon and Jae Tex, your comments appear to suggest that there are no people living in this country that are willing to perform those same jobs for less pay. . . Now that I think about it, I would bet that some of the people currently holding those jobs would perform them for less pay, if faced with the alternative of Unemployment. I read stories all the time about people loosing their jobs and going to work somewhere else where they make upwards of 45% less than what they were making.

The next question then becomes "Whether the government should impose a minimum wage in this country?"

An initial consideration is the entire time individuals are in the workforce, say 40-50 years (age 20-65/70). For someone with more than a couple remaining years in the workforce, we should avoid forcing a choice between lower pay or unemployment benefits. These are the folks who should be trained for a function which will last longer. Additionally, as long as the market requires a task to be performed (but mostly by an overseas workforce), a certain percentage of these tasks should be available domestically for that segment of the workforce willing to accept salary below the living wage, and so product providers can more thoughtfully manage the entire production process.

dallastophoenix
29 September 2004, 07:18 PM
i just wonder why detroit didn't attempt to replicate atlanta'a huge economic success. i realize that atl is a booming sun-belt city, while detroit is hardly booming or sunny, but both have huge black populations. i'm not sure where i stand on the economic incentives offered by the city of detroit for this branded area.

one of my black friends from europe always shakes his head when he hears the "african-american" or african-anything moniker used in america. he says that although some of the current black population in america has an african heritage, plenty are caribbean or from elsewhere... he states that he and his black friends don't understand why the american black population continues to harp on the african theme - after all, "they're americans, and some don't even really know if they're family is from africa to begin w/."

actually, when he was in LA w/ me 2 months ago, a black guy at a bar came up to him and started talking to him about all of the good-looking "african-american" women in the bar. my friend smiled as he replied, "yes, those women are beautiful, but how are you sure their of african descent? that seems a bit hasty to assume... what if she's from the caribbean like me? just because we're the same color does not mean we have the same heritage..." I just watched w/ huge eyes and a gaping mouth. luckily the guy hadn't had that much to drink, and he calmly said that he never thought of it that way... i thought it was definitely an eye-opener for that guy - for me as well, and could be for so many other people.

Lakewooder
29 September 2004, 07:29 PM
Teresa Heinz-Kerry recently caught hell for proclaiming herself "African-American" because she's from Mozambique...

drumguy8800
29 September 2004, 07:59 PM
wait, nevermind.

(deleted post)

Geaux Tigers
30 September 2004, 07:15 AM
Teresa Heinz-Kerry recently caught hell for proclaiming herself "African-American" because she's from Mozambique...
...that's awesome!!!! lol :D

tamtagon
30 September 2004, 10:41 AM
I hope Kerry wins just so we can finally have a first lady with some huevos.

gc
30 September 2004, 01:02 PM
Ethnics protest Detroit's plan for African Town
Members of other minorities say district shouldn't exclude them
September 29, 2004 - BY MARISOL BELLO - FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
http://www.freep.com/news/locway/detplan29e_20040929.htm

Members of Detroit's Latino, Asian and Arab communities demanded a public apology from the City Council on Tuesday, denouncing the body for embracing an economic development plan that would exclusively benefit black business owners. During a protest rally, leaders of the various ethnic communities said they want the council to rescind the resolutions it passed supporting the plan, and they want to meet with the council to correct what they say is offensive rhetoric in a report that forms the basis of the council's plan to create a black business district to be known as African Town. The plan also would create a loan fund only for blacks.

The report, titled "A PowerNomics Economic Development Plan for Detroit's Under-Served Majority Population," says immigration has hurt blacks because Mexicans, Asians and Arabs take jobs, resources and other opportunities from blacks. "The language in the report is divisive," said Angela Reyes, one of the protest organizers and head of the Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation.

She said the Latino community supports any effort by the council to help improve the economic condition of poor blacks, but added, "To blame immigrants, particularly Hispanics, is ludicrous. We're suffering under the same conditions." At least 30 people gathered in front of City Hall Tuesday evening, marching with signs. "We are opposed to any government action that distributes public money based on race," said Marisa Ming, executive director of the Asian Pacific American Chamber of Commerce in Auburn Hills. The protesters said they do not oppose the city creating a business district called African Town as long as others are not excluded.

They took issue with some of the language in the report, for which the council paid $112,000, and which the protesters said is riddled with fallacies and stereotypes. The report refers to Dearborn as Arabtown, and says Hispanics, Asians and Arabs are classified as whites so they enjoy benefits denied blacks. Detroit's Latino activists said they were galled by one reference that read: "Even though legal and illegal Hispanics constitute only 3 percent of Detroit's population and 90 percent have been in the country less than 25 years, Hispanics aggressively demand inclusion in local affirmative action programs and in elected positions ... Rather than either distinguishing the situation of blacks and Hispanics, or pointing out that blacks are the majority population and therefore can elect who they wish, local political forces have instead acceded to these demands."

Detroiters of Hispanic descent say even though Latinos, mainly Mexicans, have been settling in Detroit since the 1800s, they remain an invisible community and have no elected representation in a city where 82 percent of the population is black. They say they've seen their share of discrimination, going back to the 1930s, when about 90 percent of the city's approximately 45,000 Latinos -- mostly Mexicans -- returned to Mexico as part of a U.S. government-sponsored repatriation program. Today, census data shows Latinos make up 5 percent of the city's population. That is a 67-percent increase since 1990.

Council President Pro tem Kenneth Cockrel Jr. and other council members have acknowledged problems with the rhetoric in the report, but say its basic premise -- to increase the fortunes of poor blacks -- has merit. Cockrel said he would welcome a discussion with leaders of the various ethnic communities. "The Detroit City Council does not embrace racism as an economic development strategy," he said. Councilwoman Kay Everett, who also opposed the plan, will hold a press conference today with community activists to protest the council's actions. Councilwoman Sheila Cockrel, who also opposed the plan, said the concept of African Town is not the issue.

"It's the fact that racial and ethnic categories would be used, and that's illegal," she said.

Geaux Tigers
30 September 2004, 07:13 PM
I hope Kerry wins just so we can finally have a first lady with some huevos.
Call me crazy, but I kinda like my women without a pair of "huevos" But, each to his own I guess...weirdo.

freewaytincan
30 September 2004, 07:53 PM
I hope Kerry wins just so we can finally have a first lady with some huevos.

We've already had one of those.

drumguy8800
30 September 2004, 09:51 PM
heuvos rancheros!!!

¡Ella tiene una botella de tomatos, no un par de huevos!