Journaling on estrip is easy and free. sign up here

Paul's Journal

paul
My Podcast Link

06/05/2009 11:56 #48843

Hundreds of People Moved Downtown!
Category: buffalo
This morning I was reading a Buffalo Rising article about Buffalo making a comeback

While I think Buffalo does seem to be making a comeback, one of the signs of change was "Hundreds of people have moved downtown in the past few years."

Seriously? I hope that number is wrong or you never use it as a positive statistic again. Anytime you measure the success of a fairly large downtown by saying hundreds of people have moved there in the course of several years, it sounds like you are being sarcastic.
heidi - 06/05/09 19:07
Really great critique of the Bass Pro development: :::link:::
metalpeter - 06/05/09 18:36
Bass Pro won't do it alone but it being by a waterfront that is improving will be a help. What hopefully base Pro will do it get other stores to come down down and other things to come to the waterfront area. Just think about this for a second or two The Galleria Mall ............ Now the the Galleria Mall around Christmas time..... I'm not going to say that Down Town could ever get that many people there Just for some shops, but the potential is there. In terms of how many people have started moving downtown who knows really? Yes there have been lofts and apartments built into places and there has been some growth, but if you want things you have in your hood and you move downtown then those things have to come someplace else, sorry Tops Niagara is down town to most people. I admit there are reasons I would like to live DT But the area needs more stuff to get thousands of people living down there instead of 100's well unless of course 998 people moved DT.
joshua - 06/05/09 14:27
I've been critical of BR since its inception - I've felt that it was redundant and acted primarily as an unofficial chamber of commerce for EV, in concert with EVA (another org I've been critical of in the past, but have softened on). BR has done a better job but I still feel it's redundant - it is a rare day that I find something of interest to me there. Lately I've gone just to read whatever (e:drew) is writing, to support his contribution.

EV alone has 30,000 residents - "hundreds" doesn't mean anything. I ranted to (e:james) at (e:dcoffee)'s party about along a similar theme - the Bass Pro store. The Bass Pro store is our area's marquis new business development, and they treat it as if it's as critical as getting Intel in here or something - how absurd! Wake me up when we have *real* economic progress going on here - of course Bass Pro is going to sound good when literally nothing else is going on or being done to bring jobs here. Our city's motto has been "Fuck it!" for some time.


james - 06/05/09 12:35
Why hundreds of people? Why not millions?

BR reports that millions of millionaires have moved downtown to restore the Statler tower.

They didn't cite any report or say "according to...". As such, I think they are full of shit.

And where is all this downtown development? Most new or restored housing is being built on the East side and lower West side in little suburban communities. Barf. Downtown got the Avanti and a new court house. That will pack in literally tens of new downtown residents! I am not sure what is going where the aud used to be. But a Bass Pro sure wont bring residents.

Buffalo Rising brings out the grump in me.

06/05/2009 11:47 #48842

Disco Biscuits at Thursday in the Square
Category: thursday
We went to go see the Disco Biscuits at Thursday in the square with (e:heidi), my coworker Sameer. It was so packed with hippies. I didn't like the song when we arrived but the music got pretty jamin by the time it ended. I can't decide if the music stepped it up a bunch (which I think happend) or if I had "beer headphones" on.

Either way it way an awesome thursday in the square. The crowd went crazy trying to get an ovation and finally after like 5 minutes they came back out. Somehow I forgot to take pictures from my phone so I stole this pic off their website for your viewing pleasure.

image

In general, the crowd was one of the most drugged and drunk crowds I have seen at the square but what do you expect from hippies. Then again I haven't been going as much as I used to, maybe its just like that now.

I love the four blocks of misanthropes and misguided youth that line main street, north of the venue and put on their own event. There were street performers, dancers, and of course the crazy militant christians were still there.

I realized for the first time last night that even though they are protesting, some of them probably secretly enjoy going and not just to "save souls." I mean imagine, you have the choice to protest reality at the mall, or at thursday in the square with all the people and music and craziness. Its probably the only concerts they get to "go to." okay, maybe besides Kingdom Bound but honestly I think those particular people would find Kingdom Bound blasphemous.

The best part was watching this 15 y/o inner city girl telling some adult protester that her slutty top didn't have any effect on her relationship with jesus because he forgave her.
heidi - 06/05/09 16:54
Josh - I'm in for those shows, too. Want to go together?
joshua - 06/05/09 14:40
Yeah it was cool to run into you guys down there. I was not surprised by the amount of hippies given the band that was there (my dad was the big guy wearing bright blue tie die but he was not alone, lol). The air was stinkin' - somebody had that Afghani out there last night! I liked the Disco Biscuits - between the Square and the harbor I plan on seeing the Umphreys McGee/MMW show, Govt Mule, Robert Randolph next week (same kind of crowd, betcha), and possibly a couple others.

I hadn't read the fine print re: the Harbor shows until today - their website clearly says $10 in advance, and $20 the day of the show. :::link::: I wonder how many people realize this? Or that you have to get these tickets from Ticketmaster or the downtown office if you want the $10 advance ticket?
mrdeadlier - 06/05/09 13:56
You're absolutely correct about Kingdom Bound. "It's at Darien Lake... Gasp! They have beer ads!!!"
heidi - 06/05/09 12:28
I had fun, too! Yea for hippies! Thank you!

Nice to see (e:joshua), (e:jason) & (e:drew) in our travels.

06/04/2009 00:29 #48836

Working till midnight
Category: work
No matter how far into the day I push my schedule I never come home on time. Today I got home now at 12:25am. Same on monday but then yesterday I left early for James' (Robert's not Jim's James') birthday so I guess it makes up and tomorrow I plan on attending Thursday in the square.

It all comes down to the fact that I really don't get a chance to program until after 5PM and then I get into a groove and don't want to stop. The time between 5-12am is when I get like 90% of the programming done and can really concentrate. Most of the rest of the day from 10:30-5:00 is documentation, meetings, politics and helping people.
theli - 06/04/09 10:27
Doesn't it just suck to work that long though?
tinypliny - 06/04/09 08:57
And the third James is Mayflower James??
heidi - 06/04/09 00:37
I definitely want to go to Thursday in the Square tomorrow... txt me? I'm a little intimidated to go alone.

06/02/2009 21:04 #48827

Seabar on Washington

We went to Seabar on washington for James' birthday. The food there is so delicious and beautiful.

The bright red one was "beef on weck" which is raw beef wrapped around rice and more beef, dipped in salt and caraway seeds. I also had marlin for the first time.
image
image
image
image
jbeatty - 06/03/09 09:15
The beef on weck is the best roll ever!
imk2 - 06/03/09 08:21
omg, that looks sooo delicious!

06/01/2009 14:23 #48814

Workfare instead of welfare?
Category: government
A continuation of (e:paul,48807) What about a workfare program? What if instead of paying people to stay home, we give them state job doing all the things that need being done.

Obviously, I am only talking about people who are physically capable. If childcare is an issue than they could pick child care providers out of the group and have them watch children while the parents took turns working.

I mean our society has so much stuff that need to be done, and a lot of people that "desperately want jobs but can't find them." We pay them either way, why not let society (the people themselves included) reap some benefit from the tax money spent.

Then their salaries can just show up with all the other state workers? Is that ok?

There were plenty of examples of this during the depression with public works projects.
metalpeter - 06/01/09 20:33
What (e:theecarey) says it correct. I think workfare is through the county. Maybe it could go through the state also. I remember hearing that one of the big problems with workfare was that a lot of the Jobs people could do they didn't have the education for. If you think about it that makes sense. See if they had the education then they could get a job and not abuse the system.
heidi - 06/01/09 20:31
Paul -

To give you some numbers, I need to know what kind of "welfare" you're objecting to/curious about... there multiple social programs that someone considers to be "welfare":

TANF: Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. This is the program that replaced AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) back in 1996 with Clinton's Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which is the program that (e:James)' comment describes. As both names suggest, they're focused on kids and their parent(s). The exact program regulations and $ benefits vary by state, but it's the main program that is called "welfare"
:::link:::

Social Security (federal welfare for old people and kids who have lost a parent)
Social Security Disability (federal welfare for people w/disabilities, including HIV/AIDS)
Supplemental Security Income
Medicaid (state-administered federal health care for poor people)
Medicare (federal health care for seniors & disabled)
SCHIP (state-administered federal health care for poorer kids)
HEAP (heating/cooling assistance for poor people)
Food stamps
WIC (women, infants & children food assistance)
Title XX (funding for childcare for working parents)
Unemployment Compensation
Workers Compensation (workplace injury care)
Earned Income Tax Credit (returns earned income tax dollars to poor people)

Here's the NYS list of assistance programs:
:::link:::

In PA, the equivalent of the Safety Net Assistance program is "general assistance" and the benefit was approx. $197 per month. I'm pretty sure the recycling collectors along Allen St. make more than that.

I'd also like to contrast TANF expenditures, which in the Obama FY2010 budget would be approximately $19.3 billion with "corporate welfare": "According to the Cato Institute, the U.S. federal government spent $92 billion on corporate welfare during fiscal year 2006. Recipients included Boeing, Xerox, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical, and General Electric.[5]" (I don't particularly trust Cato, but it's a nice line for my purposes at the moment.)

FY2010 US Dept. of Health & Human Services budget
:::link:::
I couldn't find actual FY2008 TANF expenditures, but Bush's budget was approximately $15 billion - and let's not discuss all the "marriage promotion" activities that included.
ajay - 06/01/09 18:33
A few years ago, NYC decided that if you're physically capable of working and on welfare, then the City would require you to work cleaning up the streets, etc. IIRC, a lot of the folks affected protested. The protesters were all hefty guys who could have done the job easily; but they were protesting the fact that the jobs were "beneath" them....

I think if someone's on welfare and they're not (a) in school, bettering their sills, or (b) doing job interviews, then they should be required to do mundane tasks like cleaning up grafitti, sidewalks, abandoned houses, etc. Alternately: give preference to contractors who will take welfare people off the rolls.
theecarey - 06/01/09 16:21
Interesting, (e:jim). I forgot that many of the recipients are children only.
I wouldn't be opposed to giving them "government chores", though.
On that note (e:paul),as part of the welfare process, if an individual is physically capable of working,then they have to look for work and/or be expected to work an assigned amount of hours per month as part of being in the system, at a location predetermined for them. It could be shoveling public sidewalks, picking up garbage, clerical duties, farming, etc. So there is a workfare program in place. At first consideration, I do like your idea about childcare- choosing some qualified individuals from the mix to look over the others children (and that may already be in place?)
The amount "paid" to those in the workfare program is the absolute minimum. There are two things I am unsure on:
1. what the rate of pay actually is. It used to be much less than "minimum wage", with the idea that the individual would be better off finding independent employment that would likely pay much better. That "pay rate" may have changed to provide a minimum monetary expectation now. Anyone have data? and,
2. There has/had been much debate as to whether these people are considered "employees" of anyone, and if they have employee rights etc. Again, I haven't checked recent data to what, if anything has changed over the years. If they are still not classified as "employees" then their "wages" as per criteria would not be published based on this.

On a related note, to what degree would/does having low wage "workfare participants" benefit the state (and some private companies) more than if they hired out right workers? We may have people abusing the system, but that would also include the state and businesses that hire them- an initiative to keep people in the system, perhaps? Just thoughts..
deeglam - 06/01/09 15:07
fabulous idea.
paul - 06/01/09 14:53
James: I am curious about that plus total payouts.
Jim: I think plenty of people have additional dependents to stay on it. that is why I suggested the childcare part.
james - 06/01/09 14:45
This is from a 1994 report from the House Ways and Means Committee. Though, it would be very interesting to see more up to date information.

Race
--------------
White 38.8%
Black 37.2
Hispanic 17.8
Asian 2.8
Other 3.4

Time on AFDC
---------------------------
Less than 7 months 19.0%
7 to 12 months 15.2
One to two years 19.3
Two to five years 26.9
Over five years 19.6

Number of children
-------------------
One 43.2%
Two 30.7
Three 15.8
Four or more 10.3

Age of Mother
------------------
Teenager 7.6%
20 - 29 47.9
30 - 39 32.7
40 or older 11.8

Status of Father 1973 1992
-------------------------------------
Divorced or separated 46.5% 28.6
Deceased 5.0 1.6
Unemployed or Disabled 14.3 9.0
Not married to mother 31.5 55.3
Other or Unknown 2.7 5.5
jim - 06/01/09 14:44
If you are capable of working, and don't have dependents, you can't stay on welfare for very long already.

"About 44 percent of TANF households are not subject to federal or state time limits because they are “child-only cases” â€" typically, children living with a relative or families in which the parent is not eligible for benefits."

So, almost half the list would be names of children. That's not very awesome.
paul - 06/01/09 14:39
Ya, that part is true? Where are those numbers? That is kind of what I am asking for?
james - 06/01/09 14:37
But that, more or less, happens a lot already.

Last year I qualified for HEAP, food stamps, and medicare. I didn't have any of those and I worked almost all of last year except December. It wasn't for the government, but I worked like a lot of people who receive assistance do.

I think it would be important in this discussion if we had some actual facts and figures on welfare. How many people receive it, how many work, how long people are on it, etc. Otherwise this is just speculative.