environmental justice, exactly?

Republicans would consider it giving them federal lands for profit and plunder

Kids might want parks and playgrounds

Mayors and community leaders want libraries and outdoor concert halls

Bike trails, nature centers, walks, hunting ...

Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_justice

So everyone gets a piece. But the developers will always be back for more!

Two generations before I was born, a lot of relatively poor workers moved to be close to jobs.

The generation before I was born, those jobs had grown to be good jobs and those poor workers had families.

The generation I was in didn't like the fact that the companies that produced these jobs polluted and were loud, and insisted on regulating those companies because they had a right to having circumstances change to ensure that their newly recognized rights were upheld. Confronted with restrictive regulations that limited what they used to be able to do, made costs higher, and coupled with high wages and aging infrastructure, those companies either moved to low-rent areas or, more frequently, couldn't meet the prices offered by their competition and went out of business.

The harbor of a port some 15 miles away was being dredged in that time period, and the toxic, foul-smelling sludge was deemed worthy of being put in a containment basin near the community, helping to make the community in the early '70s surrounded by sources of pollution.

The relatively uneducated population that relied on the blue-collar jobs simply became unemployed and dispersed while the area became yet another white-collar bedroom community. White collar workers bought up the deflated housing prices. The white-collar workers then pointed out that houses and land similar to theirs in other areas were worth far more, and their had the right for their low-bought properties to soon appreciate to match similar real-estate prices elsewhere. More restrictions caused the remaining blue-collar jobs to vacate for better, more hospital climes.

We won't talk about the suicide, drug abuse, and alcoholism rate as the blue-collar neighborhood rotted. It was very dysfunctional, but nobody really cared. What mattered most was that the school, which had no advanced academics for nearly 20 years, with the new population suddenly became a magnet school with gobs of AP and dual credit courses.

Had this been a community of color, "environmental justice" would have been at issue, and the resulting displacement of population would have been "gentrification." The crappy schools would have been a racial or ethnic issue. (Of course, the racial skew went from mostly white when the school was barely adequate to more racially integrated as a result of the white-collar population's immigration.) But it was 95% white, so it was just a poor community that needed to be diversified, and gentrification wasn't a problem because those moving in were less monochrome. In other words, the community didn't deserve equality.

It's where we put the environment on trial.

(Saying, "cut it out" wasn't enough.)

Your words:

Spitfire of ATJ
10. "What is environmental justice, exactly?"

View profile
It's where we put the environment on trial.

(Saying, "cut it out" wasn't enough.)

Do you really believe you can accuse me of "mocking people and towns" when you know full well I was mocking Hillary?

...how on earth are we going to pay for it? Much less get it through a Republican Congress? Hypocrisy, thy name is Clinton.

This primary school brought to you by McDonald's, Coca-Cola, and ExxonMobil.

my son's $358 inhaler, along with kids like him. And the fact that my house is still worth 1/3 less that it was than when I signed the contract almost 11 years ago. WTFever. Keep breathing that toxic corporate PAC fund in sHillery.

That's unconscionable.

My chemo, which was "conventional" and did not involve life-saving drugs (this chemo has been around for decades), cost about $23K/round, which consisted of minimal administration and was mostly an IV drip I took home for 2 days. I did 12 rounds.

An NIH site I found online showed the real cost is about $3600/round for both admin. + drugs.

Now why would insurance companies agree to pay for "allowed charges" that are so much more than the real cost? Either they are getting kickbacks from the drug companies (who charged most of the "allowed&quot or Big Insurance is writing off what $ they don't get---- they do separate contracts with providers---- as "losses." If the latter, insurance cos. are taking huge tax deductions.

Much smaller.

Federal Revenue Sharing , etc. targeted economic development its works for red or blue areas large or small.

I'd like to know.

SFB.

Sanders promised $200 billion per year over 5 years. Hillary promises $125 billion.

A difference, yes. Of how MUCH money should be used for community infrastructure.

But why the hypocrisy, Hillary supporters?

sweeping idea.

...and how will she get a Republican Congress to go along? Please share.

She has addressed this at length: her plans, how they will be funded, how she has congressional support, her experience fighting with Republicans to get things accomplished, "incremental change" which to those who need this spelled out means small steps forward, and building on the progress and support of President Obama.
She has been criticized at length here on DU by Bernie supporters who say her proposals aren't as lofty as Bernie's. She has already calculated into them the factors above and knows what she can get done and will not promise more than that.
I am supporting the only candidate running that can stop what would happen if she did not win, which would be awful for democrats and all Americans, and awful for democracy.
Hillary Clinton can and will build on the progress President Obama has made. We cannot afford any step backwards.

Republicans in the House are already lined up as to which ones get to star in her impeachment hearings.

....And you sound like a goddamn 30 minute political spot. I ain't buying it. I've known what Hill and Bill are about since the 80's. They will say damn near anything to get elected and then govern center right at best. Hill and Bill's records speak volumes of that.

Besides, unless she governs by executive order, she won't get jack, incremental or not, out of what many hillarians consider a Republican Congress in perpetuity. If in fact the make up of the house can change within a 2 term presidency, then we might as well go all the way. This country doesn't need half steps and political feel good soundbites. It needs real, significant change.

And as far as Bernie's ability to get things done in Congress, put down the damn cool aid and follow the link.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-you

...how is she going to pay for it and, better yet, get it through a Congress that's controlled by Republicans? Inquiring minds would like to know.

............... Clinton additionally tied the lead-tainted water disaster in Flint, Mich., to conditions elsewhere in America where black neighborhoods suffer the most from negative environmental exposures.

“I will say what I said in Flint about your state of schools here in South Carolina: if the water had been poisoned in a white affluent suburb of Detroit, if the schools were falling apart in rich suburbs of Columbia or Charleston, there would have been an outcry,” she said.

Those in the crowd were encouraged by Clinton’s words. Columbia resident Sandy Jowers, a retired educator who said she worked in rural schools in South Carolina, supported Clinton’s message of supporting struggling schools.

“She had a loud message about trying to get more assistance to the children, by improving schools, education and the facilities,” she said.

“As a Democrat, she’s more in line with my beliefs in taking care of the downtrodden and poor and those who can’t help themselves,” added retired computer specialist Russell Dowery.

Esp for young folks. One problem I see in poor areas is a lot of kids don't get their first job till they are much older and then they have to develop work skills way later than when kids in areas of economic prosperity is.

In summation, What's good for Wall Street is good for the nation.

Hillary is not going to do either sending money to depressed communities or rebuilding infrastructure because it would cost her donors too much money. She is not going to spend her donor's money to improve life for ordinary people.

Infrastructure spending always pays for itself. Even Larry Summers, of all people, made that argument with regards to fixing the roads, so it's not a big thing for any candidate to support. All you have to do is point out the savings that you make from loss prevention, then peg the infrastructure costs to the studies that say you lose X.

Then laugh at anyone who votes against it.

Arguing that government spending doesn't actually do anything and it's just there for shits and giggles or something is the wrong way to go about it. Government really is "here to help." (A riff on Regan's stupid "most terrifying words" bullshit.) If you repair a really shitty road that is putting billions of dollars of wear and tear on vehicles, that is an economic stimulus on repairs that don't need to be done. Vehicle crash prevention, tires, maintenance, fuel savings, and even time savings for drivers who are stuck in traffic all day and can be more productive elsewhere.

This is what government does best when it does it. Tens of thousands of city planners work on this sort of thing every day, and without it, we'd be doing way worse off. Basic policy work.

What Clinton is doing here is repackaging basic infrastructure spending as a minority based thing, which is easy to get passed once they strip the minority stuff from it in committee and throw bones to white communities that also need this kind of spending.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Infrastructure_Reinvestment_Bank

Venues

concerns of people at a large venue. Large venues = talking at people, not with.

Inquiring minds want to know...

This program was mention in the OP article.


Joan Walsh ?@joanwalsh Feb 11

And @HillaryClinton talks about Rep. Clyburn's 10-20-30 plan for poverty. I wrote about this: http://www.thenation.com/article/are-black-women-ready-for-hillary/ …

Nope.

Is she going to implement a WPA-type project to build a broadband network as a utility?

Nope.

Is she going to implement a WPA-type project to modernize the water and sewage distribution systems?

Nope.

Sounds like more retail "revitalization" to provide for consumerism for imported products.

The town vitally needs an Ikea and Pier One.

That'll bring back jobs alright.

Meanwhile SC exports cotton and imports shirts.

Hey! I know! Maybe she can get Rahm down to show how the town can make a gazillion dollars selling the parking meter franchise to a German company.

REALITY! u go Sisty!

Old White Dude is all pie in the sky

Your statement is offensive.

They are both very experienced candidates

especially post and courier...somehow scalia passing on the night of the republican debate in south carolina where clementa pickney democrat and ame church goers were slaughtered by dylann roof...confederate flag waver and so carolina republicans who stayed up all night to vote for the confederate flag after...while not religious I feel this was divine intervention...allelujiah! and that we should not miss this opportunity to make the supreme court available to reign in the second amendment and create some real gun control.... Cheers, Maggie