Category: life

04/28/09 09:19 - 49ºF - ID#48531

First Weekend of Summer

I love living in South Buffalo. We had a great weekend, actually a great week.

Wednesday and Thursday we hung out at our neighbor's house next door, had some food and drinks. We've met a lot of our neighbors already, it seems like summer is going to be full of activity. It was nice to spend some time, and get to know the 2 families in the house next door.

Friday 2 friends came over after work. We hung out in the yard, enjoying the excellent weather. We assembled our fire ring, but we got hungry and didn't end up lighting our first fire. But it was the first time we've actually hung out in the backyard with friends. We had a little dinner party, with some pasta and homemade sauce. I do make good pasta sauce, instant gourmet :)

Saturday, Mr Softie in the hood. Parked right outside my house. There are a ton of kids in this neighborhood.

Saturday

We went for bikeride. We had no perticular direction. First we dropped by a friends house to see their newborn baby, passed a hotdog stand on South Park Ave so we stopped for a bite to eat. Passed a street musician after we left, playing guitar at the bus stop by the library. Then mom's house, we found her outside gardening, of course :) Finally we rode around Cazenovia Park, and then around South Park Lake too. We saw a saxophone player outside the Botanical Gardens too. Such a nice day for a ride, it's like the whole neighborhood was in bloom.

I love Hot Dog stands, woodside and South Park :)

Outside Mom's

Dudes Fishin' at Caz Park

Baseball Game

Cazenovia Creek

South Park Lake

Outside the Botanical Gardens

Later we showed off our new house to one of mom's out of town friends. Then we all went out to dinner at the Blackthorn. Mom's friend in a Buffalo native who is actually moving back to B-lo from North Carolina because she misses the people, cheap living, and the friendliness.

At around 8 we went to a friend's birthday party in East Aurora. we stayed outside on the back deck and the porch, except to refill our wine glasses, and use the piano, she has a player piano, one that plays those song scrolls. Fun stuff.

Rockin' the Player Piano, that cabinet in the back is full of scrolls.

Sunday

I worked outside, starting my vegetable garden in the back yard. We had dinner at mom's house, backyard barbeque! Enjoyed my first corn on the cob of 2009, along with sausage, veggie-burgers and pasta salad. Cooking on the grill, lovin' the outdoors.

Molly says hi :) Actually she wrote some of this post!

Permalink: First_Weekend_of_Summer.html
Words: 487
Location: Buffalo, NY

Category: politics

04/16/09 10:00 - ID#48410

Taxed to Death??

Yesterday was tax day. There were a bunch of symbolic protests across the country. "Tea Party" protests. here's the article about the one in Buffalo

Anyway, I'm not going into detail here. but one slogan I saw a few places.

"Born Free, Taxed to Death"

There are a lot of ways to die... That's one of the reasons we have firefighters, and police, and traffic signals, and Medicare, Social Security, and the Food and Drug Administration.... you get the idea.

In many ways, we actually pay taxes to protect ourselves from death. Because paying $25 per year to help fund a Police force is a lot simpler, cheaper, and easier than hiring a private security force, or detective, or getting a gun or a baseball bat and going all vigilante style.

Maybe that's going a little too far, according to the Buffalo News Tea party Protesters "said they favor spending on the military, police, roads and other critical infrastructure,"

But... "social welfare programs such as Social Security and Medicaid had few fans."

"...yea... fend for yourselves.. you over 65 socialists, we don't owe you shit!!! One for.. me, and ... all for .. none... or... All for me, and none for you!!! whatever, Hows'it go?...."

I guess it sounds good. "I work hard for my money, I deserve to keep it all. And if somebody's got more money, i guess they just work super hard, and they deserve it too."

my point is this; if we worked together, we wouldn't have to bust our ass all the time just to get by.

"Yea! screw Social Security... I should be able to put my kids through college, pay medical expenses, insurance costs for my car and house, oh.. pay off that student loan. and have plenty left over to retire!... Yea!! freedom!!!!!"..../ what the fuck is that shit.

If we didn't spend so much time worrying about the future, worrying about illness, college loans, retirement... I know I'd have a lot more freedom.

We have to work together. It's patriotic, and human to care about your neighbors, your family, the citizens your country. It's supposed to be "all for one, and one for all" We should look out for each other.

You know teachers work hard, so do farmers, so do computer programmers, and so do your parents... and we all couldn't get by without them. But they each make different amounts of money. And it's not because they don't work hard enough, most of the time it's just cruel luck.

You also don't need to be greedy to work hard. or to contribute to your society. I think that selfcentered individualistic bullshit is un-American. How about soldiers? They're some of the most selfless, hard working people you'll meet. totally not motivated by greed. they want to help people.... imagine that, motivated by an urge to help. Not so hard right? I think it's just human nature to want to help.

"E pluribus unum" it's on our money, a motto adopted at the founding of this country, it's Latin for "Out of Many, One," it means we're all in this together.

The essential point of government is to help us work together in an orderly way. Government is not the problem, selfcentered politicians have betrayed us.

PS. my Father in-law is in the paper, the last 4 paragraphs, about the counter protester with the Veterans for Peace Tee Shirt

uncutsaniflush writes at 09:51:13 04/17/09 - Comment #47690: (e:dcoffee) - just for the record, most of the soldiers that I've known have seen combat but I didn't mention them because they were drafted. My stepfather was a veteran of World War 2. Many of my neighbors when I was growing were veterans of the Korean War. And many of my friends older brothers were drafted to fight in Vietman. Some of them even returned alive but a litte worse for the wear and tear on their souls. The only people I know who served in the first Gulf War were Reservists who unfortunately died in Kuwait.

Over the years, I've known a lot of soldiers.
By the time they have seen combat, I agree, most soldiers are selfless.

dcoffee writes at 09:29:17 04/17/09 - Comment #47689: Whatever occupation you choose, money really shouldn't be your first concern. We have different talents, and we should do what we're good at, that's what makes us happy. And that's how we live up to our full potential.

But I'm kind of focusing on the idea that, taxes are always bad, and that keeping 'my money' will magically make life better. I can definitely understand the idea of cutting wasteful spending, and reducing the deficit and our national debt.. I really think Obama understands that too. But to cut Social Security and Medicare? Sure they need to be more efficient, but life without them would be terrible.

I could have talked about all the offensive signs about socialism, and fascism (these people obviously have no clue what fascism means) but I wanted to talk about the central argument, Taxes, and weather or not life would be better without them.

I think this anti-tax stuff is a symptom of our rabid individualism, and I think Americans need a little more "We're in this thing together, and we're going to have to cooperate to to make life better for all of us" And it matters how people are doing, not just myself.

Tax money should absolutely be spent wisely, but we NEED to pool our resources, we need to work collectively. I think this anti-tax thing is also an impulse because people don't trust government. Fix the government, don't starve it to death.

Alright, here's the solution, I should write a post on this. Ready..

Democratic Taxation, Instead of handing over a lump sum to the government, you prioritize your values. Say there's 20 different funds, education, war, environment, healthcare, retirement, assistance to the poor, etc. You chose your own priorities, 20% here, 30% there, 50% for that. I spend my money like I'm voting. I do this every day when I go to the local restaurant, not applebees or burger king. Why not do taxes the same way?

about Soldiers. Most of the ones I've met are at weddings, and they've been in combat. They get married and ship off again in a few weeks. Why they joined may have been motivated by many things (cash, education, direction), but what they do, is selfless, and you see care and dignity on their faces. Don't get me wrong, I think those in power like to keep us poor and desperate so we might end up in their war machine. But my point is that we all value selflessness, the hardest right winger will say "thanks for your service" and they honor the idea that this person has sacrificed something for all of us. Being selfless is human. This individualistic stuff sounds good, but it's not as valuable as selflessness.

dcoffee writes at 12:45:43 04/17/09 - Comment #47669: I'm focusing on the idea that taxes are always bad, and that keeping 'my money' will magically make life better. I can definitely understand the idea of cutting wasteful spending, and reducing the deficit and our national debt.. I really think Obama understands that too. But to cut Social Security and Medicare? Sure they need to be more efficient, but life without them would be terrible.

I could have talked about all the offensive signs about socialism, and fascism (these people obviously have no clue what fascism means) but I wanted to talk about the central argument, Taxes, and weather or not life would be better without them.

I think this anti-tax stuff is a symptom of our rabid individualism, and I think Americans need a little more "We're in this thing together, and we're going to have to cooperate to to make life better for all of us" And it matters how people are doing, not just myself.

Tax money should absolutely be spent wisely, but we NEED to pool our resources, we need to work collectively. I think this anti-tax thing is also an impulse because people don't trust government. Fix the government, don't starve it to death.

Alright, here's the solution, I should write a post on this. Ready..

Democratic Taxation, Instead of handing over a lump sum to the government, you prioritize your values. Say there's 20 different funds, education, war, environment, healthcare, retirement, assistance to the poor, etc. You chose your own priorities, 20% here, 30% there, 50% for that. I spend my money like I'm voting. I do this every day when I go to the local restaurant, not applebees or burger king. Why not do taxes the same way?

about Soldiers. Most of the ones I've met are at weddings, and they've been in combat. They get married and ship off again in a few weeks. Why they joined may have been motivated by many things (cash, education, direction), but what they do, is selfless, and you see care and dignity on their faces. Don't get me wrong, I think those in power like to keep us poor and desperate so we might end up in their war machine. But my point is that we all value selflessness, the hardest right winger will say "thanks for your service" and they honor the idea that this person has sacrificed something for all of us. Being selfless is human. This individualistic stuff sounds good, but it's not as valuable as selflessness.

jason writes at 11:45:23 04/17/09 - Comment #47659: When people start bringing straw man arguments to the table, and ridiculously lazy thinking such as calling it sour grapes, or using bumper sticker slogans, it isn't about desiring an intellectual discussion. People who shit on these protesters don't want to understand the other side or their concerns - they just want to ridicule and play make believe about the nature of their own counter argument.

Now, I'm not going to criticize it any further than that, because I used to shit on the burnouts at Bidwell all the time, and the same thing applies to how I treated them. If you want to simply make fun of them, have at it. Nothing wrong with it. I didn't attend a tea party because, like the war protesters, if you're not in power you don't get to make the rules. Tough luck. Obama won't listen to the Tea Party protesters any more than Bush listened to the war protesters. I just think in most cases it's pointless other than to blow off some steam.

I think there is a difference between what America IS, and what America COULD or SHOULD be. I think there is some confusion about America being a fan of collectivism to the extent that the European Socialists are. We're not, and that's not who we are today. E Pluribus Unum has nothing to do with this.

If you decide to be an elementary teacher, instead of a developer, you know in general the amount of money you make will likely be less. I don't understand how that's cruel, or unlucky for the teacher who weighs this when choosing what to do with his life.

If you're the taker instead of the giver overall, it's easy to think of yourself as having more freedom. Of course you do, in the example of a society where education costs nil to students, you are free to not have to pay for your own education. That's someone else's burden. I'm sure it would be liberating. I'd love if I could saddle some other asshole with my student loans.

It sounds like all I'm doing is criticizing, but the bottom line is this - I agree with you to an extent that it is our obligation to look after each other. We are in this together. I do agree that the current model of health care needs to be modified. I do believe in taking care of your brother man. What we have in America is a love of mocking and shitting on your brother man instead of listening to them. Who is immune? Nobody! =(

What I don't agree with is the idea of government taking the money you would normally donate, and deciding for themselves what's appropriate. That's not freedom. I do not agree with creating an even bigger bureaucracy than already exists, and giving the government more control of my life cheaply or freely. I do not agree with the baby boomers saddling us with ongoing expenses that we can't afford, and not talking about how we're supposed to sustain this level of government long-term without saddling the common man with a bigger tax burden. Howard Zinn has an idea - get rid of the DoD, and get rid of capitalism. It always comes down to getting rid of capitalism for that guy.

Now, I already know one of the questions I'm going to get because it's always the first one when I debate this stuff - "So Jason, what about Boooosh?" Yeah, I hated the bank giveaways too. I know the *real* Libs are upset by Obama's continuation of this stuff. Which by the way, we are going to have to all pay for eventually. We're all going to be eating freaking health pellets by the end of all of this.

uncutsaniflush writes at 11:37:03 04/17/09 - Comment #47658: I'm with (e:jenks) on soldiers. I, personally, known people who joined the military so that they could get:
1. technical training while in the service
2. college educations with the G.I. bill afer they leave the service
3. avoid jail (joining the military was part of a plea bargain)
4. be a musician in an Army band
5. get away from an abusive home situation
6. a job after being laid off
7. a job after high school with no prospects of a job in their hometown.

Of course, this was inbetween wars, so they probably didn't expect to see combat.

Perhaps it is different now, but I don't think so. Alternet.org has good (imho) discussion of why young people join the military: :::link:::

jenks writes at 10:55:06 04/17/09 - Comment #47655: just to play devil's advocate- I'm not sure that everyone that joins the military does so out of a simple pure desire to help people. I know plenty who have joined b/c either they 1- couldn't do anything else, or 2- just wanted the perks, and were betting that they'd never actually have to serve. Felt like it was an 'easy' way to a 'free ride'.

libertad writes at 09:17:03 04/17/09 - Comment #47652: OH those teabaggers! I like what your father and law said.

Permalink: Taxed_to_Death_.html
Words: 585
Location: Buffalo, NY

Category: buffalo

04/15/09 10:39 - 50ºF - ID#48396

Urban Farm

Hey, you probably heard about this already. It's been going on since last week.

This couple, Mr and Mrs Stevens, they've got 7 kids, they moved to Buffalo's East side from the country. They own a home on the Fillmore ave on the between Broadway and Sycamore. They have 2 acres of open lots behind their house, all of which are owned by the city. They requested to buy the lots and turn it into a farm. The city said no. Here it is in the Buffalo News

Here's the land

Behind Fillmore, between Broadway and Sycamore.

What do you guys think?

Should farming come back to the city? Without a huge increase in population, what will happen to abandoned neighborhoods? People keep sprawling homes over farmland, and the city is left with abandoned homes to demolish, how can the city rejuvenate itself? The East Side, how does it get better, where can it go. I don't think you can ignore the East Side and expect the rest of Buffalo to Recover. So where is the east side headed, and how can it be positive?

The area around the proposed farm was a dense, popular Buffalo street at one time, a central Business District for the East Side. Broadway Market is still there. But now it's one of those places you drive around and get depressed. The once magnificent buildings on Fillmore and Broadway just look like death. and most of the people who live in the area would rather move. It's a shame. I get furious when I think of how we let our cities rot. First they went to Cheektowaga and let Broadway rot, now they move further out and toss Cheektowaga out like a half eaten happymeal. Back in the 60s it would have been easy to help the East side, and all of the city, now look what we've got.

I'm pretty familliar with the East side, went on the Tour de Neglect twice, that's about 7-8 hours riding my bike around, and used to drive out to MLK park every other weekend.

The way I see it, the City is absolutely foolish not to allow people to turn acres into farmland. The one thing the East side has going for it is the open space, nature has reclaimed areas, and it's a beautiful thing. You can look as some buildings and businesses as assets, but as a whole, the peaceful open spaces are the strength of the East side.

The Mayor would rather see new houses constructed there. Like there's a shortage of homes. Yea, I know, new homes, people like those. Well, I've seen plenty of them abandoned and boarded up too, on the East side and in South Buffalo. I don't think the houses that were there were the problem, it's the neighborhood that nobody wants. new homes can be wasted just like the old ones if the neighborhood has no heart.

I got tons of links on this, the city seems to be getting a lot of bad press, even that Buffalo News article, on the front page, big picture, titled "City Says E-I-E-I No" There's stuff in Artvoice

Buffalo Rising

WNY Media is doing video, oh, and there's a Facebook group I joined, it's getting close to 400 members

the non-profit Broadway Fillmore Alive has links to a bunch of different stories

oh, by the way, there is a farm in the City FYI Mayor Brown, it's about 4 blocks East of Main St. Queen City Farm

Saturdays at 9 you can volunteer.

metalpeter writes at 05:41:16 04/16/09 - Comment #47642: Well I'm kinda mixed on this issue my self.
-I live in the city If I wanted to live near a farm I would live in the country
-The people who wanted to do this should have looked into it before they bought the house instead of the other way around
-I do like the idea of having an urban farm and it is a good idea to use the area, but if you all ready have a plan with Habitat you can't really go back on that (plus that sends the message that agreements made mean nothing if you change things when some else comes along).
-Yes that part of town is kinda rough. There is this Idea that the reason houses get run down is because the people who own them don't live there, and that is true sometimes.
-People assume that poor people destroy places and sometimes that is true. But often what happens is that renters don't feel like it is their neighboorhood. So when they see bad shit go down they don't say anything. But when these people own a house it causes them to care about the area and what they own. I do agree with that.

---- Here is what should Happen. The people should be allowed to buy all the land. However there should be a set of time maybe 5-7 years that they must run a farm there. If it fails or they stop or they decide to open some thing else up or move or something along those lines they are held to strict stipulated penalties of some kind. What if they start this farm have it for 2 years and go broke and then move during the night and leave the house behind and now you have to start the plan all over. In terms of building new homes. I'm sure there is some place else in that area where the city can use federal money to knock them down and build new ones. On a side note I think Jannelle makes a lot of good points that there needs to be an entire system used for urban farms. Will this farm have animals and food will be grown or is is just like a huge Garden. What happens if someone from the hood goes into it at night and plants pot who makes sure that doesn't happen? Also what about zoning? What is allowed? -----

dcoffee writes at 11:49:09 04/16/09 - Comment #47626: Hmm, from what I've read so far I think Habitat is flexible, they realize there is a lot of open space and are willing to look elsewhere. I also heard Habitat was surprised that the mayor even knew about their Wilson st. idea and didn't like his using it as an excuse to deny the farm permit.

Personally I'm not so keen on livestock, chickens, pigs whatever, cause you'll have to build shelters and deal with their waste. but I think farming plants is quite positive.

and as paul said, "we all know how easy it is to make farmland into subdevelopments."

there are community gardens all over the city in empty lots, and they're always regarded as positive things, politicians go and make speeches in them for photo ops. They're more popular now, and some of them have veggies too.

As for the masterplan excuse, there is a plan from about 4 years ago, building on the Queen City Hub plan, it was created by 'East Side Good Neighbors Planning Alliance' each neighborhood had a 'GNPA' it's community folks, they create the plan for their own neighborhood. the Wilson St. lots were down for parkland/greenspace. So housing might actually go against that. :::link:::

I think beautifying the open spaces will lead directly to a more desirable neighborhood, and better home values. I think it would actually help more than new-build homes. The East side will attract bargain shoppers, do it yourself people, who'd buy a house cheap and put some sweat into it. Maybe a house with an empty lot next door they could farm. Realy, who wants to buy a house there, thrifty self sufficient people.

Also, there really is a farm East of Main near Utica, and it's 3 acres, bigger than this one.

And PS. zobar, I'm totally changing my user sound to the Talking Heads.

james writes at 11:42:54 04/16/09 - Comment #47625: Ya, the lease offered had a clause where they would have to be off the premises in 30 days. No Farmer in their right mind would take that.

janelle writes at 10:11:41 04/16/09 - Comment #47624: I think that Habitat for Humanity offered to allow them to use the land temporarily but they declined. It's probably not worth their efforts.

That's why I say the individuals should have done a little more planning ahead of time.

paul writes at 09:58:25 04/16/09 - Comment #47622: I say why not let them build a farm with a short term permit - say 5 years - and see how it goes. There is definately not an urgent need for housing on the eastside or anywhere in Buffalo. I mean so many of the houses are completely destroyed - which means no one wanted them.

If it doesn't work - we all know how easy it is to make farmland into subdevelopments. However, if they build one of those newstyle plastic sided subdivisions, it is a little more difficult to turn it back into farmland and required demolition, etc - although I am sure the eastide would be capable of that oer ten years.

james writes at 09:05:11 04/16/09 - Comment #47621: I agree to an extent Janelle. However, I do not think there is any long-term vision for this particular neighborhood. The mayor's plan for new housing is a great way to build some new homes that devalue to nothing over the course of ten years. You cannot simply install a sustainable neighborhood. Having Habitat for Humanity build low-cost homes is fine, but this particular neighborhood is in the middle of no where. There is a two acre lot because the homes rotted into the ground.

The farm is a great way to incrementally stabilize the neighborhood. First, it puts the land back on the city's bankroll. Ka-Ching! It puts a business in there that is not necessarily dependent on local consumption. Ka-Ching! It ties in to other local businesses like the Broadway Market. Ka-Ching. If it does take off and stabilize neighborhood housing prices, it would become feasible to rehab or construct new housing, eventually making the farm's land value to great they would be fools not to sell it and homestead some other rotten part of the city. At worst, the farm doesn't make it but the city collects tax on that land for a few years. At least there wont be any new construction on that land to demolish.

janelle writes at 08:35:29 04/16/09 - Comment #47620: While I think urban farming is an interesting idea, the city has a responsibility to consider how the idea fits into a broader plan of development. They shouldn't hand over land to every person who comes by with an idea and it would be irresponsible city planning to do so.

Obviously the city isn't entirely opposed to urban farming because of the farm on the west side. And David Rivera's office is diligently working on the backyard poultry issue.

I wonder if these people did any research on the issue when they moved here. If they wanted to do urban farming, it might have been more beneficial for them to spend some time checking out different neighborhoods, seeing where it might be viable, and having discussions with the local councilperson to garner support for the idea.

I would like the city to explore urban farming because it would be an interesting way to use vacant land. But there needs to be a system in place to consider where the farm will go and the impact on the area. Farms seem so nice and idyllic but the byproducts of farming could further add to the pollution in the area. So I rather not have people just putting up farms wherever they can claim a piece of vacant land without any thought or oversight.

zobar writes at 07:55:29 04/16/09 - Comment #47619: This used to be real estate, now it's only fields and trees. Where have they gone? Now it's nothing but flowers. The highways and cars were sacrificed for agriculture. I thought that we'd start over, but I guess I was wrong...

If the neighbors are down [if there are any neighbors] and they can get the money, I don't see why it's any of the mayor's business what they do. The upside of the whole thing is that if the city turns down enough money for enough projects they don't like, it's going to put more pressure on the city to articulate and follow through on this master plan of theirs.

...and as things fell apart, nobody paid much attention.

- Z

heidi writes at 11:55:57 04/15/09 - Comment #47618: ARGH! I have lazarus installed on the other ocmputer! I had a beautiful long comment and now it's gone! :-(

(e:dcoffee), thank you so much for posting this!! I definitely agree with you about the potential of urban farming as a path for reclaimation and encouragement of community & economic development.