22 May Feeding the plan with federal grant money
“We live now in an era where normal values have been displaced. The good is called bad, the bad – good.” – Anna Politkovskaya.
“What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” Francis Fukuyama, The End of History?
Using federal grant money to fund and expand the tentacles of Sustainable Development has a number of ugly realities. First, and easiest to understand, is that this is a money redistribution scheme that helps bankrupt both the federal government and the middle class. The money wasn’t allocated specifically by Congress to fund grants that come from HUD, EPA, DOT, DOE (and maybe other sources as well).
Second, the projects into which this money goes do very little to improve the infrastructure, to help stimulate the local economy or to benefit those it is ostensibly designed to help. I say ‘ostensibly’ because that is what those handing it out and those spending it say it is for, but it is truly a wealth redistribution plan as noted in first paragraph.
Let’s look at just one of the grant sources, the Community Development Block Grants:
As noted by the Cato Institute, CDBG activities are supposed to meet one of three objectives: (1) benefit low- and moderate-income persons, (2) prevent or eliminate slums or blight, or (3) address a serious need or threat that has particular urgency.9 A huge range of activities meet these criteria, including:
- acquisition of property
- construction or repair of streets, recreation facilities, and other public works
- demolition and rehabilitation of public and private buildings
- public services and planning activities
- assistance to nonprofit and for-profit groups for community development purposes
These ‘plans,’ supposedly put together by the local metropolitan planning commission along with the city or county council are just like every other plan in every other community in the world. Yes, the world, not just the U.S. Can anyone say that Kalispell, Montana, San Francisco, California, Knoxville, Tennessee, Lhasa, Tibet and Saigon, Viet Nam are so alike that it is only natural that their General Plans for the next 10 or 20 or 50 years all look the same?
Moreover, these plans are building non-elected boards and regional councils made up of ‘stakeholders’ (private political organizations – NGOs affiliated with the UN – that are not local, but travel the nation, imposing Sustainable community plans, and thereby feeding off the grant money). Also cashing in are major corporations and business owners who are looking to cash in through Public Private Partnerships,
Look at just one local community’s take from the federal government and stop and think about how much control the feds take for their largess with your money. Then multiply that by every city and county in the country:
________________________________________________