-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
Selling the vacant schools has proven difficult because of a lack of buyer interest and deteriorating building conditions. Some sales and projects have fallen through and the successful ones can take several years. In all, 14 empty buildings were still publicly owned in January.
Summary and audio linked here.
Much of the routine trade and investment between China and America is entirely appropriate and in America’s interest. But inserting the Chinese Communist Party into America’s pay-to-play system and its economic development strategy isn’t just crossing a line. It’s a leap into an abyss of stupidity.
Summary and audio linked here.
Illinois paid the price for embracing Fauci’s “science.” Here’s the retrospective.
Podcast link is here.
Maybe if they took the restrictions off wh can buy them they would sell. These cannot be bought by private or charter schools, per CTU.
Housing for the illegal immigrants maybe? No, not after the asbestos abatements, ADA compliance and getting them up to the lofty standards of public housing that end up costing almost 1M / unit.
I would imagine that the emphasis on “schools” is to proffer an argument that closing schools is bad and that CTU is prescient in refusing to allow underutilized and under-performing schools to close. I would also imagine that if you substituted “any building larger than a single home which is largely abandoned” for schools, the study would reveal that large, empty buildings with open space around them become hang-out spots which, in turn, creates areas for neighborhood disputes to be resolved. If these properties were taxed, the owners would likely tear them down to reduce the property tax rate or… Read more »
Tear them down before they become data centers
Yes, why are these schools vacant? Sell them off or tear them down. How much is CPS spending to keep these eyesores on the books? Or lost in property taxes?
Because Stacy says they stay up
from NIH research:
“The Looser a State’s Gun Laws, the More Mass Shootings It Has”
“Researchers have begun to see a trend: The rate of mass shootings is consistently much higher for places with fewer restrictions on guns.”
IL has some of the toughest gun laws, yet look at how many shootings, mass or otherwise, Chicago has every weekend. Oh, excuse me, these guns are coming from states with looser gun laws. Maybe it’s better to look at the perpetrators and not the guns. Also, for example, UK has very tight gun laws. How are homicides being committed? Stabbing and beheadings with knives. Stabbing up in Chicago, too. Ban knives? England is trying that, too.
so you are suggesting that because people may stab other people with knives we should also allow them to shoot people too?
btw, you may want to look into the facts before making such a claim:
“The U.S. murder rate is consistently 4 to 5 times higher than the UK’s. In recent data, the U.S. homicide rate hovered around 5.5 to 6.0 per 100,000 people, while the UK sits at roughly 0.9 to 1.0 per 100,000”
If the gun violence that’s been a fixture of Chicago for decades hasn’t gotten you to see the folly of gun control; than nothing will. It’s the old saying:
There 3 kinds of people
Those who can see
Those who can be shown
And those who can never see
actual facts show otherwise:
Countries with strict, well-enforced gun regulations consistently experience significantly lower rates of gun violence and firearm-related fatalities than those with highly permissive laws. Extensive public health research demonstrates that limiting access to firearms is a key factor in reducing both homicides and mass shootings.
Gun Control Does work…
Just ask Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao and Fidel Castro.
It worked pretty good for them… :-/
The first line in the introduction to an NIH report on mass shootings:
Mass shootings account for less than 1% of firearm deaths in the US.
More gun grabbing nonsense from people that don’t enforce the hundreds of gun laws already on the books when the “ wrong “ people are apprehended.
If you break down gun violence by race, everything becomes more clear where the gun problems are. It’s the typical Vermont vs. South Side dichotomy. Talk about disparate impact, massively disparate impact there.
Yeah, yeah…remove the guns…that will fix the problem. The real problem is why certain segments of the US society are too stupid to understand any other way of settling disagreements other that killing regardless of whether it is a gun or knife or anything else. Removing fire arms from law abiding citizens is just stupid – The first thing communists, fascists and dictators have done in history is remove fire arms from the public. The political dictators, the military and private police now run the country through force – without resistance. Without the ability for the people to defend themselves… Read more »