OWS: From Fannie Mae to Fannie Mayhem
Jack E. Kemp
Abandoned buildings have often become home of squatters in poor neighborhoods, a number of them drug addicts.This week's leftist (NY) Village Voice has an article which discusses possible new directions for Occupy Wall Street including the idea of squatting in abandoned foreclosed office buildings and private homes. I suspect they will not object to any neighborhood but their parents - assuming the parents have the will to threaten to disown them. An article entitled "Occupational Hazards: Could Occupy Wall Street survive without an occupation?" (by Rosie Gray) speculates that:
http://www.villagevoice.com/2011-11-16/news/occupational-hazards/
BEGIN QUOTE
On the topic of going indoors, one idea getting kicked around is occupying foreclosed buildings, something that has already happened on a small, temporary scale in Atlanta and Harlem. This lacks the visual punch and presence of an outdoor occupation, but it also provides a realistic solution to a pressing issue: the cold. (According to Burke, there have already been 20 cases of hypothermia at OWS.) It also addresses the foreclosure crisis, an issue that's supposed to be important to many protesters. Not everyone would be allowed to occupy the foreclosed buildings, which limits the presence of rabble-rousers.
The foreclosure plan probably won't occur on an OWS-wide scale, says a source. Most of those who suggest squatting in foreclosed properties or finding businesses or real estate companies that will shelter occupiers during the cold maintain that the Zuccotti Park occupation can and will continue. "I don't think that it would end because it
provides a lot of juice to be here," says occupier James Molenda, 32.
END OF QUOTE
They say "not everyone will be allowed to occupy the foreclosed buildings?" That essentially means one of two
things. Either there will be a large enough - and armed - force to drive away drug addicts, the homeless and other
undesirables, making the occupation elitist. A disgruntled person shot through a window of the White House today
- and they have very good security. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/white-house-shooter-arrested_n_1097824.html?ncid=webmail1 Or if the OWS security force won't be able to stop the shootings, rapes, drug use, they will now spread to other commercial and residential neighborhoods. If the municipalities can't shut off the water, then the water bill becomes a city (taxpayer) expense. Would OWS do something to illegally turn the flow of water in a building? Does a big bare protester sh** in Zuccotti Park?
Now banks holding worthless property titles can possibly be legally libel for the blight they bring on commercial and residential districts by not securing their property from a flash mob of squatters. And banks thought they could go along with no background check home loans - and not protest the lack of financial and personal standards - and then pass the problem on to Fannie Mae and the General Public Treasury. Bankers, for not opposing these NINJA (No Income, No Job and No Assets) mortgage deals all the way to the Supreme Court (and that woudn't have guaranteed them a favorable decision), now have to face a new, growing nightmare. Come to think of it, a group of OWS squatters could push out people living in what are technically foreclosed properties. This is not that far fetched a scenario, as OWS is looking more and more like the French Revolution every day.
The current scenario is quickly becoming the worst case scenario.
Abandoned buildings have often become home of squatters in poor neighborhoods, a number of them drug addicts.This week's leftist (NY) Village Voice has an article which discusses possible new directions for Occupy Wall Street including the idea of squatting in abandoned foreclosed office buildings and private homes. I suspect they will not object to any neighborhood but their parents - assuming the parents have the will to threaten to disown them. An article entitled "Occupational Hazards: Could Occupy Wall Street survive without an occupation?" (by Rosie Gray) speculates that:
http://www.villagevoice.com/2011-11-16/news/occupational-hazards/
BEGIN QUOTE
On the topic of going indoors, one idea getting kicked around is occupying foreclosed buildings, something that has already happened on a small, temporary scale in Atlanta and Harlem. This lacks the visual punch and presence of an outdoor occupation, but it also provides a realistic solution to a pressing issue: the cold. (According to Burke, there have already been 20 cases of hypothermia at OWS.) It also addresses the foreclosure crisis, an issue that's supposed to be important to many protesters. Not everyone would be allowed to occupy the foreclosed buildings, which limits the presence of rabble-rousers.
The foreclosure plan probably won't occur on an OWS-wide scale, says a source. Most of those who suggest squatting in foreclosed properties or finding businesses or real estate companies that will shelter occupiers during the cold maintain that the Zuccotti Park occupation can and will continue. "I don't think that it would end because it
provides a lot of juice to be here," says occupier James Molenda, 32.
END OF QUOTE
They say "not everyone will be allowed to occupy the foreclosed buildings?" That essentially means one of two
things. Either there will be a large enough - and armed - force to drive away drug addicts, the homeless and other
undesirables, making the occupation elitist. A disgruntled person shot through a window of the White House today
- and they have very good security. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/white-house-shooter-arrested_n_1097824.html?ncid=webmail1 Or if the OWS security force won't be able to stop the shootings, rapes, drug use, they will now spread to other commercial and residential neighborhoods. If the municipalities can't shut off the water, then the water bill becomes a city (taxpayer) expense. Would OWS do something to illegally turn the flow of water in a building? Does a big bare protester sh** in Zuccotti Park?
Now banks holding worthless property titles can possibly be legally libel for the blight they bring on commercial and residential districts by not securing their property from a flash mob of squatters. And banks thought they could go along with no background check home loans - and not protest the lack of financial and personal standards - and then pass the problem on to Fannie Mae and the General Public Treasury. Bankers, for not opposing these NINJA (No Income, No Job and No Assets) mortgage deals all the way to the Supreme Court (and that woudn't have guaranteed them a favorable decision), now have to face a new, growing nightmare. Come to think of it, a group of OWS squatters could push out people living in what are technically foreclosed properties. This is not that far fetched a scenario, as OWS is looking more and more like the French Revolution every day.
The current scenario is quickly becoming the worst case scenario.
posted by Timothy Birdnow | 4:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home