After my trip to Nigeria, I was inspired by the young people who knew so much about politics that I promised to educate myself with American politics. It’s been on and off so far, with most of my news coming from NPR and the Onion. But I think I've found a morning routine that works for me. And it all starts with the Wall Street Journal.
I wake up every morning and take a shower. If I wake up early enough I eat my breakfast, and then go to work. After two rounds in the parking garage, I go to the security office and pick up one of the extra Wall Street Journals they have sitting there. I then go to the vacant building or my car, and spend the next hour reading up on the day’s events. The WSJ is like the New York Times, in that they report important news (very little tabloid stuff when compared to Daily News or the NY Post) and appear to be amongst the least un-bias newspapers. What I like about this routine is the way I feel when I’m done. It’s as if I’ve been informed about what’s going on around me, and I can use the internet to further my knowledge of topics I found interesting in the WSJ. Take the topic of the Supreme Court for example.
Everyone was celebrating the gay marriage ruling a couple weeks ago, as well as the ruling that upheld the Affordable Healthcare Act. It was all over the news. A less reported Supreme Court ruling caught my eye and really made me shake my head in shame. On June 25th the Supreme Court ruled on racial discrimination in housing. They decided that there should be a broader definition for what constitutes as race discrimination when it comes to housing. Say, for example, I get a prospective tenant who is African American and wants to move into Property 2 and its neighborhood, which is predominantly white. I do my background check and decide to go with someone who makes more money. That prospective tenant can now sue me for race discrimination, even though their race had NOTHING to do with my decision. The only criteria to be ruled on is that the prospective tenant is African American, the neighborhood is white, and they were denied. That’s it! How crazy is that??! This ruling further deviates from the original housing law, which was designed to base housing on subjects other than race. This interpretation of a well-intentioned law is so screwy.
The argument is not whether the Fair Housing Act is necessary because it is. The argument is whether broadening the definition of racial discrimination will help or hurt the situation. I don’t like how this administration is pushing out policies and enacting laws with broader definitions, making it easier for people to abuse (I’m sure all administrations do this, but I just started paying attention). I didn’t get into the real estate business to be Martin Luther King. I got into this business to make money. Making money means that you keep things simple. If I buy in a white neighborhood, I’ll most likely keep it white. If I buy in a black neighborhood, I’ll most likely keep it black. I use the term “most likely” because there are other factors that I consider. If a black prospective tenant makes more money than a white prospective tenant, I may decide to change my mind based on finances. If a white guy wants the place and dresses like crap while a black guy dressed to impress, I may use their appearance as a deciding factor. See?? There’s more to fair housing than race, which was the underlying basis for the Fair Housing Act in the first place. It’s kinda sad how an admitted racist can interpret this law better than the Supreme Court, who then justifies their interpretation on the grounds of racial diversity.
There is, of course, more to this topic and I could go on for days about the history of racial discrimination and all. But I’ll stop here. This is just one small example of how my new morning routine is helping me. I'm officially a member of the informed community. Every time I finish reading the WSJ, I get this strange wonderful feeling... like I'm connected and ready for the day or something. I become more aware of my surroundings and can see how the ever-changing political environment is either hurting or helping me. That’s good business, no matter what side I’m on.
I wake up every morning and take a shower. If I wake up early enough I eat my breakfast, and then go to work. After two rounds in the parking garage, I go to the security office and pick up one of the extra Wall Street Journals they have sitting there. I then go to the vacant building or my car, and spend the next hour reading up on the day’s events. The WSJ is like the New York Times, in that they report important news (very little tabloid stuff when compared to Daily News or the NY Post) and appear to be amongst the least un-bias newspapers. What I like about this routine is the way I feel when I’m done. It’s as if I’ve been informed about what’s going on around me, and I can use the internet to further my knowledge of topics I found interesting in the WSJ. Take the topic of the Supreme Court for example.
Everyone was celebrating the gay marriage ruling a couple weeks ago, as well as the ruling that upheld the Affordable Healthcare Act. It was all over the news. A less reported Supreme Court ruling caught my eye and really made me shake my head in shame. On June 25th the Supreme Court ruled on racial discrimination in housing. They decided that there should be a broader definition for what constitutes as race discrimination when it comes to housing. Say, for example, I get a prospective tenant who is African American and wants to move into Property 2 and its neighborhood, which is predominantly white. I do my background check and decide to go with someone who makes more money. That prospective tenant can now sue me for race discrimination, even though their race had NOTHING to do with my decision. The only criteria to be ruled on is that the prospective tenant is African American, the neighborhood is white, and they were denied. That’s it! How crazy is that??! This ruling further deviates from the original housing law, which was designed to base housing on subjects other than race. This interpretation of a well-intentioned law is so screwy.
The argument is not whether the Fair Housing Act is necessary because it is. The argument is whether broadening the definition of racial discrimination will help or hurt the situation. I don’t like how this administration is pushing out policies and enacting laws with broader definitions, making it easier for people to abuse (I’m sure all administrations do this, but I just started paying attention). I didn’t get into the real estate business to be Martin Luther King. I got into this business to make money. Making money means that you keep things simple. If I buy in a white neighborhood, I’ll most likely keep it white. If I buy in a black neighborhood, I’ll most likely keep it black. I use the term “most likely” because there are other factors that I consider. If a black prospective tenant makes more money than a white prospective tenant, I may decide to change my mind based on finances. If a white guy wants the place and dresses like crap while a black guy dressed to impress, I may use their appearance as a deciding factor. See?? There’s more to fair housing than race, which was the underlying basis for the Fair Housing Act in the first place. It’s kinda sad how an admitted racist can interpret this law better than the Supreme Court, who then justifies their interpretation on the grounds of racial diversity.
There is, of course, more to this topic and I could go on for days about the history of racial discrimination and all. But I’ll stop here. This is just one small example of how my new morning routine is helping me. I'm officially a member of the informed community. Every time I finish reading the WSJ, I get this strange wonderful feeling... like I'm connected and ready for the day or something. I become more aware of my surroundings and can see how the ever-changing political environment is either hurting or helping me. That’s good business, no matter what side I’m on.
No comments:
Post a Comment