Pope Francis is correct about the failures of market capitalism. But there's a small problem ...

The current Pope's economic critiques make a great deal of sense. So much so that even as an atheist, it means I'm tempted to make common cause with the Church. The problem is the Pope's theological obligations, which tend to take away what the Holy Father's economic platform giveth. We pagans tend to be burned first. 

But I'll give Francis major props for daring to tackle the prevailing neoliberal dogma, even while being sure I'll hear about it, probably from the economists first.

Pope Francis Laments Failures Of Market Capitalism In Blueprint For Post-COVID World, by Sylvia Poggioli (NPR)

Pope Francis has presented his blueprint for a post-COVID-19 world, covering a vast number of issues from fraternity and income inequality to immigration and social injustice.

The document, released Sunday, is his third encyclical — the most authoritative form of papal teaching.

Its title is Fratelli Tutti, and it is a scathing description of laissez faire capitalism and a meditation on the coronavirus pandemic that has swept across the globe.

Coyle sitecapades: In New Albany, Democrats WILL be Republicans ... and Jeff Gahan WILL stay on the down low.

TH, a first-time council attendee, was in the crowd last night. As the crisply tailored suits from Flaherty and Collins made their case for "high level" coddling, with frequent assistance from David "Our Corporate Welfare Clerk" Duggins, TH messaged me on Facebook.

If anyone is allowed to ask questions, the question or statement to be made should be that their job creation numbers have to be horribly off. He said target renter would be 50k per year. After taxes, utilities, and a rent of $1,100 dollars the person will not have disposable income to spend downtown.

I observed that the decision had been made long before last evening's propaganda exercise.

Back door politics. I couldn't comment good or bad if the complex is a good thing, but I think it would be deceitful if it was sold to the public as a job creator with a tenant target that only makes 50k, thus having no leftover money to spend. Or heck, maybe there are a lot of 50k earners better at budgeting than I was.

Numerous other broad assertions went unchallenged by council "Democrats" eager to prove the veracity of Ronald Reagan's trickle-down economics, as when Flaherty and Collins simultaneously asserted that walkability was a key to the project, but the firm is just fine with New Albany's one-way arterial street grid.

Uh huh.

Let's hope luxury tenants enjoy the sound of 18-wheelers streaming past, mere feet from the patio constructed with only the finest building materials ... and color-coordinated, too.

With the arterial streets representing a 24-hours-a-day incessant lowering of the property values that the apartment development supposedly will increase, and the ongoing degradation of adjoining neighborhoods, where the same tumescent council endorsing corporate welfare last night displays a persistent unwillingness to tackle basic infrastructure problems ... let's just say the idea that such renters will "choose" New Albany solely on the basis of the luxuriousness of the apartments and their proximity to exclusive bocce ball courts strains credulity.

So does the view advanced by Flaherty and Collins last night that these apartments alone will attract high paying jobs to New Albany, where the absence of relevant modern infrastructure works daily against efforts to lure them, dooming us to extractive economic development models.

Hence, the likes of Tiger Trucking, whose vehicles will actively discourage those intrepid apartment occupants daring to walk or ride their bicycles.

How long after the project's completion will the fences and gates go up?

It's important to remember that Democrats are doing this. Not Republicans or oil-rich Saudis. Rather, Democrats.

If you're a local Democrat fond of asking why the working class continues to mimic chickens voting for (Republican) Colonel Sanders, it may be time for a visit to the ideological mirror, but be careful: Some of you with a conscience may find it impossible to avoid disavowing the reflection.

Finally, to repeat: Mayor Jeff Gahan was in the building last night. He remained in his office as Duggins repeated the same tired trickle-down bromides and Democrats on the council rolled over like puppies seeking a good belly-scratching. There's a question in urgent need of an answer.

What good is a mayor who maintains that the Flaherty and Collins residential development at the Coyle site is of central importance to the future of the city, but cannot walk 100 feet down a hallway to make the point himself?

A stellar subsidized evening of Reaganite corporate welfare, New Albany Trickle-Down Democrat-style.

Tonight's city council verdict: In a "free" market economy, risk is a necessary condition for small local businesses, developers and entrepreneurs, while for-profit businesses of larger size, pursuing ventures of a certain vaguely defined "magnitude," must forever be sheltered from the vicissitudes of risk by means of civic subsidy.

Democrats did this -- except for John Gonder, who joined Kevin Zurschmiede in voting against the $4.9 million bond.

It bears repeating: Tonight's exercise in risk-free corporate welfare and purely trickle-down economics, wherein "luxury" apartments matter more than neglected areas of blight and impoverishment situated yards away?

Yep: Democrats did that.

Not Republicans.

Democrats.

With his spirited defense of subsidized luxury apartments as curative for what he referred to as "blight," 3rd district councilman Greg Phipps apparently has coined a new re-election campaign slogan.

"The Needs of the Luxurious Few Outweigh the Needs of the Marginalized Many." 

Mr. Spock would be appalled. Then again, he never was a Democrat in New Albany.

Jeff Gahan did not attend the meeting. At the conclusion, as I stepped into the hallway to chat, Gahan could be seen emerging from his office. He saw me, and ducked back inside.

He must have been there all along.

Wouldn't you have liked your elected mayor, and not an appointee like David Duggins, explain the merits of this purportedly transformational luxury bocce empowerment project?

I sure would. More tomorrow.

Just like here, this development is anything but.

Over and over again, local governments tell us public investment in and making exceptions for chain stores and larger out-of-state businesses is the only way to develop a town or city. New Albany is no different. But it doesn't work and we know it doesn't work. Cities just keep doing it anyway, pouring money into no and low return "investments" while others do the public heavy lifting for less.

Posting examples repeatedly gets tiring but, for the sake of sport, here's another.

The Taco John's of Buffalo by Jordan Then (Strong Towns)  

As you can see, the older buildings have a value 212% higher per square foot than the new Walgreens. The city collects $51,284 dollars in property tax on the older buildings compared to $26,013 from the new Walgreens. The older buildings also contain 15 businesses and an unknown number of second story apartments, which enhance the overall walkability of the neighborhood, while the blank wall of the Walgreens provides nothing for pedestrians.

Given the innumerable examples - what some may call "evidence" - it's at least somewhat heartening to see an analyst, in this case Aaron Renn, taking the question to those who tend not to like them.

Do Cities Really Want Economic Development? by Aaron M. Renn (Governing)
A poor economy and all the problems that come with it actually benefit some people, giving powerful players less incentive to improve the status quo for the rest. 

Jane Jacobs took it even further. As she noted in The Economy of Cities, “Economic development, whenever and wherever it occurs, is profoundly subversive of the status quo.” And it isn’t hard to figure out that even in cities and states with serious problems, many people inside the system are benefiting from the status quo. 

They have political power, an inside track on government contracts, a nice gig at a civic organization or nonprofit, and so on. All of these people, who are disproportionately in the power broker class of most places, potentially stand to lose if economic decline is reversed. That’s not to say they are evil, but they all have an interest to protect.

From SW Michigan to S Indiana: "How the Chamber of Commerce Hurts Our Community."

Perhaps Southwest Michigan First's antics do not provide an exact match with the persistent chicanery of One Southern Indiana, but it's close enough for rock and roll.

How the Chamber of Commerce Hurts our Community ... Who is Southwest Michigan First putting first? (hint- not the environment and not poor people), by Matthew Lechel

... The problem with the Chamber of Commerce, Southwest Michigan First and the status quo ‘economic development’ community is twofold. Firstly, these groups hold our communities hostage in the name of jobs. The damage this causes impacts our community primarily environmentally, but also culturally and socially. The second major problem with the current economic development paradigm is that the primary product they’re selling (government subsidy of private business) is something we aren’t even sure works. That’s why it’s called trickle down economic THEORY. There’s loads of evidence increasingly showing that taxpayer handouts to profitable companies under the auspice of job creation doesn’t work. Of course there are other folks (particularly those who benefit handsomely) who say trickle down economics does work, and only more time will fully prove that. One thing is for certain, based on past actions the economic developers are not in any way interested in showcasing to the public their gamble with taxpayer resources works. Especially when they can get the local paper to simply assume it is a positive investment and report accordingly.

"Even non-believers can’t deny the inherent wisdom and clarity of the pontiff’s critique of the modern capitalist economy."

I love it. First the skeptic's examination of an icon (Zizek on "Mandela’s Socialist Failure"), and now a Pope willing to examine contemporary capitalism and its “trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world.”

The world turned upside down? Unlikely, but some good reading for an atheist on a Sunday morning.

What the Pope Got Right About Capitalism: Even non-believers can’t deny the inherent wisdom and clarity of the pontiff’s critique of the modern capitalist economy, by Robert Scheer (The Nation, from Truthdig)

Forget, for the moment, that he is the pope, and that Holy Father Francis’ apostolic exhortation last week was addressed “to the bishops, clergy, consecrated persons and the lay faithful.” Even if, like me, you don’t fall into one of those categories and also take issue with the Catholic Church’s teachings on a number of contested social issues, it is difficult to deny the inherent wisdom and clarity of the pontiff’s critique of the modern capitalist economy. No one else has put it as powerfully and succinctly.

It is an appraisal based not on “just pure Marxism coming out of the mouth of the pope,” as Rush Limbaugh sneered, but rather the words of Jesus telling the tale of the Good Samaritan found in Luke, not in Das Kapital. As opposed to Karl Marx’s emphasis on the growing misery of a much-needed but exploited working class, Francis condemns today’s economy of “exclusion” leaving the “other” as the roadkill of modern capitalism ...

As in, Your-(i)-Nation.