Friday, November 13, 2015

Podcasts + Social Matter Recap + Preview 22

Would you guys listen to a weekly podcast run by me? It'd be 30 minutes or so touching on the weird stuff of American politics, culture and society. I'd call it "Weimerica Weekly". I could discuss the insanity around us, and there are plenty of topics to discuss each week. It would be me, and if I can wrangle anyone into being a guest, maybe one or two people could join. We will see, but stay tuned. If this gets going, I, or Social Matter if they host it, would gladly accept a sponsor.

Last week I wrote about how the Feds are going to send section 8 blacks into the suburbs. Lots of page views on that one. It is below, but there have been 9 comments on it over at SM, including a piece of the puzzle that I missed. Go read it there. This week I will discuss the problem of SCALE, how the system loves it and how it creates scams within scams when it becomes involved in an issue. Housing just happens to be the perfect example of it.

------------------------------------------------------

Each new evil that bubbles up from DC rarely is released to the rest of America at the same speed. This summer's announcement to radically transform the suburbs by the federal government has been hushed up fairly well. Steve Sailer has spent post after post discussing it, but rarely does a pundit mention this plan. The progressive media cannot mention it because it might spark a Boston Busing Riot. The right has not figured out how to make it fit their political pitch, if they even want to make it fit. The thing no one really discusses is how this would be implemented.

How will you get blacks to the suburbs? That is what we are talking about here. When President Obama discusses diversifying areas, you can eliminate the idea of moving whites on government assistance to white suburbs. You can also eliminate the idea of moving poor whites into black areas. Hispanics in public housing and in line with their population numbers. The public data shows that blacks are overwhelmingly the dominant group using public housing programs in our multiethnic society. Blacks make up 33% of project based section 8 households and 45% of public housing and voucher households. Blacks have also been the subject of weepy news articles discussing black poverty, black communities full of violence and mind control, voodoo by whites, causing their neighborhoods to become hellholes. Pay no attention to the white, gay and Asian gentrification squads that turn those same neighborhoods into hip, safe spaces once the blacks are gone.


The fights will be between local governments and the federal government withholding money. The fight will be for developing lots and old buildings into apartment complexes that cater to disadvantaged Americans. Now if a community is a little bit black, it might be spared. Inner-ring suburbs will most likely be free of these cramdowns. They already have been invaded, and you can find the whites and well to do minorities of those suburbs sending their kids to private schools. Outer-ring suburbs and exurbs have much more to fear because as the most recent creations of white pioneers, they are most likely the whitest.

For example, the Midwestern city Indianapolis is a metropolis with no water border so development can proceed in 360 degrees. If you look at the development north of the city along the formerly more prosperous townships and the bedroom community "northeast corridor", you will find townships such as Washington and Lawrence that were absorbed by the city decades ago. Blacks in the city core fled each other poverty and crime to apartment complexes and cheap developments in those inner ring suburbs. Those township schools became bad enough that whites sent their kids to private schools, and if they could not afford to, they moved to Fishers, McCordsville and Carmel for quick commutes. If they were fine with a longer commute or priced out, they moved out to Noblesville, Fortville and Westfield. Looking at the population breakdowns and demograhpicchanges, cheap land sucked in well to do blacks who do not want anything to do with poor blacks in the townships, and now Carmel, Fishers and McCordsville all have black populations between 4-10%. Noblesville, Fortville and Westfield are all below that level of precious diversity. They are the most at risk. As the progressives say, they will require diversity enrichment.

Those communities are most at risk not just for being the whitest, but for economic and political factors. Raj Chetty's data seems to favor the growth of exurbs and suburbs and cites poor mobility for major cities. This trick of people reverting to the mean protects wealthy neighborhoods in cities and older suburbs from invasion. With fewer resources, exurbs and newer suburbs will not be able to fight the federal government as well. This happened in Portland, Oregon where the middle class eastside could not fight progressive calls for fairness as well as the westside, and now it is a dump. It is not just a dump but the underclass residents flooded into the area do not have the means to do anything about it. Another economic factor is that as exurbs, they were saddled with incomplete developments, stalled growth and foreclosed families moving out. This is their weak spot, and where the Feds will get them.

Wall Street and other big investors have been scarfing up distressed homes and renting them. While the focus is on the states hammered by the housing crash, exurbs in smaller markets are worthy of the vulture treatment. They keep waiting for a rebound to unload the properties, but in the meantime are renting. 
Wall Street played a central role in the last housing boom by supplying easy — and, in retrospect, risky — mortgage financing. Now, investment companies like the Blackstone Group have swooped in, buying thousands of houses in the same areas where the financial crisis hit hardest. Blackstone, which helped define a period of Wall Street hyperwealth, has bought some 26,000 homes in nine states. Colony Capital, a Los Angeles-based investment firm, is spending $250 million each month and already owns 10,000 properties. With little fanfare, these and other financial companies have become significant landlords on Main Street. Most of the firms are renting out the homes, with the possibility of unloading them at a profit when prices rise far enough.

Because of their pricing power and no recovery in the job market in sight, there are no new buyers and companies can place rent increases. Here is the devious part and where the symbiotic relationship between the banks and the federal government comes into play. These same firms have been turning these rent checks into pooled securities for investment. This is the Federal Reserve's world of zero interest rate policy. Everyone is chasing yield. Securitized rent checks become an asset with a yield well above what a 10 year Treasury yields.

The federal government can provide these same firms with guaranteed renters and guaranteed cash flow. The greatest bit will be Wall Street receiving a high yield but with reduced risk due to the government subsidized rent. The banks provide the federal government with a landlord that has control over dozens or hundreds of homes in a white majority area. The section 8 tenants move from the landlord in the city to the landlord out in the green suburbs. The renters just become a new conduit for Wall Street to suck money away from tax payers. By partnering up with a major force like high powered Wall Street firms, the federal government has options and can fine tune where they send people. No one is checking to see the wreckage left behind from prior minority relocation attempts, and no one with power cares. Plus, there will be new parcels of even more remote land to sell to fleeing middle and upper-middle class families. There might even be some pricey and new developments and high rises in metropolitan areas formerly occupied by the very section 8 tenants shoved into the suburbs.

Even if Wall Street wants to leave the party of renting and sell the assets, the federal government is making moves to help them replenish the sucker pool. New Fannie Mae rules for credit score calculations will make it easier to minority borrowers to get mortgages. American policymakers have forgotten how minorities, due to federally mandated requirements on mortgage lenders, fueled the prior bubble and crash. Tucked away but inspiring Bush's owensership society push and expanded Latino lending was the sweetener that made Democrats support the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed Glass-Steagall: banks could only merge if they had great scores on minority lending measures and the Community Reinvestment Act provisions. The Feds are sending disadvantaged borrowers to slaughter again. This is a repeat of the end stages of the prior bubble. While we had a near death financial experience in 2008, nobody went to jail and our economy remains hooked up to the FED's fiat, easy money machine.

Would this not be the same thing as using easy money mortgages to send minorities into the suburbs during the housing boom? Yes, and it is by a combined Wall Street-DC progressive design. A quarter of a century ago, Robert Rubin selected Bill Clinton as the horse he would back in the 1992 presidential campaign. The financial coup he performed on the Democrats turned them into Wall Street's best friend even if the rhetoric used at campaign stops demonized Wall Street. President Obama is the latest version of that marriage, and Hillary Clinton looks to repeat Bill's efforts. The progressives in charge of the federal government have a desire: disperse the blacks and free up the cities with minimal public confrontations. Wall Street has a need: maximize yield and reduce risk. What major force will represent the interests of exurbanites and suburbanites from seeing their neighborhoods get a taste of Detroit, St. Louis and Gary, Indiana? No one. Sorry, exurbs and suburbs, but the DC-Wall Street axis will use your safe, quiet communities to experiment with for profit.

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

I would definitely listen. You knocked the two kevins interview out of the park.

craig said...

I absolutely would listen to that podcast.

Anonymous said...

Do you predict a rise in arson?

Son of Brock Landers said...

Rise in arson? Absolutely.

Anonymous said...

A weekly podcast by SOBL, yes please!

You did well on the 2Kevins podcast.
where they cut you off rather quick.

If you need some inspiration:
American Dissident Voices
Might Is Right Power Hour
Age of Treason Radio

Son of Brock Landers said...

Thanks for the encouragement guys. These would be monologues until I could get a willing guest. My goal would be, if solo, tackle two topics. If a guest were on, discuss whatever with them.

Anonymous said...

Best first guest would be... firepower!

Portlander said...

OK, someone's gotta say it: Podcasts are bullshit.

What's the benefit?

On the consumer side, I can read a lot faster than I can listen. I can read at work a lot more discretely than I can listen. I can comment and critique written words far better than spoken words.

On the production side, I will grant it is a lot faster and easier to talk than write something that is concise, coherent, and stands-up to criticism.

Everyone agrees there was a drop in discourse going from newspapers to radio to TV. It wasn't entirely the means of production being monopolized. There is also adverse selection involved: promoting people that sound good, over those that are good. It selects for Kennedys over Nixons, and Hannities over Sailers. Don't get me started on Jon Stewart. Low IQ people can breezily follow along TV and radio (NPR I'm lookin' at you) and feel smart w/o doing any of the heavy lifting required to know what the f*ck you're talking about. It's the equivalent of all the fatties on the effing stairmasters and exercise bikes at the gym. F*ck exercise bikes.

The only benefit I see would be on a personal level, giving you training at blathering if you have plans to run for office... which, ain't nuthin', I'll grant.

Portlander said...

Do you predict a rise in arson?

Structures or vehicles?

Son of Brock Landers said...

Vehicles, structures...? Both. All.

Portlander - My thought is to discuss stuff I wouldn't flesh out into a full essay and more topical (ex: fake outrage over starbucks cups). I try to write deeper dives and stuff that fits big picture.

Diogo Fernandes da Costa Luz said...

No doubt, and I sure have a dozen listeners with me out here in Brazil.

Scott's Bluff said...

Anyone will listen to a podcast really. Your audience has grown enough to even provide you active feedback through email or Skype calls if that particular element is desired. Normally it’s beneficial to tender an interaction between yourself and the listener because it provides more vitality to a show topic, if you say what you will discuss ahead of time, or incorporates tangential topics you maybe hadn’t thought about. Listen to clips from some of the other guys out there doing solo runs, particularly comedians. The energy in their show is pepped up by feedback and if I remember correctly, sometimes their entire show is just a one-way conversation between him and his audience through emails. No predetermined outline of topics.

Also depends on how prolific you are at rambling. I assume you can do this well. I can think of two other guys like you, high verbal ability, both of whom could carry a show for HOURS just through verbal fluidity (ranting about the news, extended exegesis on some arcane topic) and bouncing off feedback. It was seriously amusing even with occasional lulls. Mind you the entertainment value is directly tied to the host’s personality. Audio or video content was a common spark for a monologue.

Both of those shows are more or less defunct though. People have lives and move on. If you start something I assume you have a vague schedule in mind or an easy exit in case it gets dull. Like anything else in life, if you find something is immensely tedious to create, the consumer will easily recognize you don’t want to be there.

You’re really pissed about this Paris attack on Twitter, maybe you should record something about that (if you don’t like something just shit-can it). Go all out. Some cucks on Twitter were complaining about Obummer’s response as if anybody takes him seriously anymore. He’s a lame duck. Just wait until Trump sees him off in 2017 with a smirk and double-handed thumbs up.

Oh last thought: the Derb has produced a solo podcast for over ten years. He just writes out what he wants to say on a script and reads it. Seems to work in its own way.

Ted Plank said...

Totally would listen to the audio version of your schtick.

Nathan Hale said...

Yes. Your interview on Grace and Steel was excellent. You have a good speaking voice and thoughtful comments.

Nathan Hale said...

"On the consumer side, I can read a lot faster than I can listen. I can read at work a lot more discretely than I can listen. I can comment and critique written words far better than spoken words."

All of that might be true. But I like podcasts at work when I'm doing something mindless or when I workout. And of course the interview portion allows you to ask questions in a free flowing manner.

I'd love to hear an interview with Peter Brimelow, particularly in light of the fact that Trump voiced support for Operation Wetback.

paworldandtimes said...

The answer is, yes. I would listen to your podcast. My preference, going by other podcasts I'll occasionally listen to would be to keep the preliminary small talk to a minimum. Listeners want to dive in to the substance immediately.

PS: you may like the parody/reinterpretation of the Eiffel Tower / peace sign everyone posts. It's over at my site.

PA

Son of Brock Landers said...

PA- Just shared the image and your site link on Twitter. As far as small talk, my goal is just me chatting crazy shit in Weimerica and occasionally get a guest.

PA said...

I saw that, sincerely appreciate that.

To clarify small talk, there was a host/guest podcast I heard recently, don't recall who. The advertised subject was very intetesting but they spent some 10 minutes on small talk and I started getting impatient, probably like a chick that wants her dude to drop the foreplay and put the meat in.

Some Millennial said...

Re: Podcast, I'd eat breadcrumbs from your hand if you'd only let me, so uh...
But I have to say, as a precaution, that "weird degen news" is a fine line to walk in terms of theme. If it's done only to say, "look at these weird degenerates, they're so horrible and gross", or "look at these wuss-men being led by women", it won't be worth the effort. I mean, Megan McCain has a segment to that effect.

It could be great, though, if the main motivation is to connect it to the root causes, point to embryonic (non-revolting) forms of the weimarness, expound upon parallels in the actual weimar republic, et cetera. You obviously have a knack for analyzing this, so if it were heavy on the brain and with little-to-no spleen it might be something really special.

Robert Rediger said...

You should have a British guest like me. It's true that I haven't written anything interesting, but then your listeners could always laugh at my accent.

Mike said...

I would listen. I enjoyed the 2kevins interview and think you do well in the Q+A format. I don't think it's something you would need to do on a regular basis but can be a nice compliment to your blogging or to flesh out bigger ideas or thoughts.

Ideally, it would be great if you could invite on some of the other alt-right folks to discuss certain topics and who have a lot to say that maybe others aren't aware of. Your blog has basically been my gateway into a lot of alt-right viewpoints and I'm grateful for that.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Yes, definitely. I enjoyed the recent talk with the 2 Kevins. No longer than 30-45 mins, Perhaps have some guests on occasionally, such as PA, Firepower, Pat, etc.

Glengarry said...

Make it a sports podcast. I came to think of this when I was listening to Bill Simmons being like so profound about Trump. We all know you have your moonlighting sports blog.

Suburban_elk said...

I listened to your podcast with those two guys.

My criticism of that show is that it seemed like those two guys were having fun and passing the time. And your end of the audio was quieter than theirs, and that problem is very frequent and always irritating.

You all know a lot about sports, and that is not my cup of tea. But all that aside, it was upbeat and that counts.

But still, watch out for that rambling, just passing the time quality, because that is probably more fun to do than it is to listen.

I listened to Derbyshire’s show when it was gratis, and as was pointed out, he would write it out and read it. He is a intellectual heavyweight, and so a monologue worked for him. His inflection and delivery is humorful which is unusual for someone his age.

So sound quality and don’t get too adrift, is my advice. And also, a podcast allows for punching up in regards to who is the guest. Whether it is a friendly or not, people are often willing to have a swing.

Gladio said...

Would listen. Would sponsor.

Anonymous said...

Suburban_elk: Radio Derb moved to VDARE and is once again free!

Son of Brock Landers said...

Gladio - If you are serious about sponsoring, send me an email to mrossi34228 at gmail dot com. I can give you the paypal account of the guys who will be hosting my podcast.

Kevin One said...

Hi Brock; I'm the other Kevin of the 2Kevins, the one you didn't speak with, the guy who does the post-production. Re: a 28Sherman podcast? I say go for it. The only way to find out whether it's worth doing is to try it. I'm certainly no expert--our show is only 13 episodes old--but if you have any questions about our experience starting up one of these things, feel free to write to me.--Kevin Steel