E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Sam Lewis
Natasha Glasgow, 30, her husband Alfredo Carrasquillo, 27, and children Alfredo, Jr., 5, and Tanisha, 9, will have a new home Tuesday if "Occupy" protesters and housing activists succeed in forcing their way into a vacant foreclosed home in Brooklyn.
A New York family with two children that has been living on and off in shelters for more than a decade will move into a new home on Tuesday, say housing activists and ‘Occupy’ protesters who intend to force their way into a foreclosed house in Brooklyn later in the day.
"We are going to liberate the house,” said Sean Barry, of VOCAL-NY, which has been working to prevent homelessness for 10,000 low-income New Yorkers living with HIV/AIDS and their families. "We want to make a public stance … for people to take sides."
The home that protesters aim to give to the Glasgow family -- which is not affected by HIV/AIDS – is in Brooklyn's East New York neighborhood, which has foreclosure and underwater rates that are nearly three times greater than that of New York state, Barry said, citing data from the housing and property database ListSource.
The move-in is part of a national day of action coordinated by the 'Occupy' movement and housing activists in some 25 cities and towns, such as Petaluma, Calif., Southgate, Mich., Atlanta and Denver.
Activists and protesters plan to march to the Brooklyn home, where they will hold a housewarming party for them -- mother Natasha, 30, father Alfredo Carrasquillo, 27, and children Alfredo, Jr., 5, and Tanisha, 9 -- and then begin renovations. Carrasquillo is a community organizer at VOCAL-NY.
Rob Robinson of Take Back the Land, a national network of organizations focused on housing rights and securing community control over land, said the protesters plan to resist any efforts by authorities to remove the family from the home in a low-income neighborhood that's home to mostly African-Americans and Latinos.
"I am going to put up a real defense," said Robinson, who will serve as the police negotiator. "Until a judge tells us we have to leave, we're not leaving that house, so the family is in that house to stay. We're not ... disruptive, we do nonviolent civil disobedience. We call it positive action."
The 'Occupy' movement served as an inspiration for housing activists, who have been trying to help homeowners facing foreclosure keep their residences.
"Like September 17, when Occupy Wall Street started, people looked at it and there was this real question, 'Is this going to last? how is it going to grow?' and one of the reasons it grew is that as people stayed down at Zuccotti Park ... other people were inspired to take action," said Matt Browner Hamlin, an activist with occupyourhomes.org. "This is not something (where) ... we want a family to have a home for a day, we want them to have that home for a lifetime."
And for 'Occupy,' the initiative gives them a new focus after the dismantling of many of their encampments nationwide.
"It’s part of a national day of action that we hope will kick off a wave of defenses and home reoccupations,” Max Berger, 26, told the Occupy Wall Street General Assembly late last week while requesting $6,400 in funding to buy tools for the project. "This is not just about one event; this is a huge frontier for us. We can do these kinds of actions all the time, and we should. And it doesn’t have to be just us. We got to do this one right so we can inspire people to do it theirselves.”
Click here for all the posts on this developing story.
Leave a Comment:
And can someone shed some light on why the police are obviously afraid to enforce the law? If I pulled something like this, my butt would be (rightfully so) sitting in the slammer!!!
I would think that they are just waiting for thing to calm down and then they will escort the family out of the house and lets hope to jail
This is wonderful! It was diret action in the Great Depression that won unions, Social Security, unemployment insurance and other benefits . It is about time someone stood up to the banks. I hope it is successful. The Democrats nor Republicans aren't going to do it. They are in bed with Wall St.
If you feel so strongly about it, how about you give up your home?
It doesn't matter who owns the house, they are still breaking in to private property. What's to stop them from breaking into more homes? What if it was your home?
These idiots are anarchists.
They should be locked up.
So the utilities must be turned off. Then it gets cold and these fools build a fire to get warm. Then the house catches fire and one of them is killed or a neighbors house goes up and they die (it does appear to be a townhouse). Who's going to be liable then? The OWS people? The fact they moved in is absolutely crazy, but now the liability factors are out of sight when you give someone a house who has lived in a shelter for 10 years. Evict them now before a major disaster occurs.
OWS picked just about the worst possible test case for this push. The moron who calls himself their "police negotiator" says they'll stay until a judge tells them to leave. Which should only take a day or two (hey, courts are clogged with all kinds of idiots, this case won't get to cut to the head of the line). As soon as this gets to judge, the judge won't even have to pause to think about it. There is not a single legal theory in American jurisprudence, western-liberal jurisprudence, or any legal system any where on the planet that allows a random group of people to walk in to a house and say "this is ours now" on the simple basis that they don't currently have a house.
It's just mind boggling that with as many people as have been legitmately screwed by fraudulent foreclosure practices by the banks, they choose a couple that appears to have never in their adult lives paid their own rent, let alone a mortgage. I doubt the Glasgows have even ever had a bank account.
If you really must insist that the Glasgows are, in any way, "victims of the system," it was only in their youth in an education system that roundly failed to set either of up with the skills necessary for life in America. But banks and the rest of economic system? Completely irrelevant.
From Yahoo News a similar story of abuse:
A Seattle woman who is receiving welfare assistance from Washington state also happens to live in a waterfront house on Lake Washington worth more than a million dollars.
Federal agents raided the home this weekend but have not released the woman or her husband's name because they have not officially been charged with a crime.
However, federal documents obtained by KING 5 News show the couple currently receives more than $1,200 a month in public housing vouchers, plus state and government disability checks and food stamps. They have been receiving the benefits since 2003.
The 2,500 square-foot home, which includes gardens and a boat dock, is valued at $1.2 million. And even though the couple has been receiving the benefits for nearly 10 years, records show that they accurately listed the address of their current home when applying for the state and federal benefits.
A federal official told KING 5 that the couple likely took advantage of a loophole, which allows low-income individuals to receive financial assistance to help them pay their rent and move away from housing projects. However, the law does not require officials to verify what type of home the benefits recipient is living in.
As if the million dollar home weren't enough, the supposedly low-income couple also gave money to various charities and traveled around the world to locales in Turkey, Tel Aviv and resort towns in Mexico, according to court records.
They call this a peaceful protest its theft, probably felony theft. Lets see what the owners do. I hope the OWS doesn't try to occupy private property in Texas, they could end up occupying a plot at Restland. Worthless Leftists ^&%$#%^&
I'm for building a fence along the boarder as long as Texas is on the other side.
Where do the jack a&& think they have a right to do this. These people our obviously not willing to help themselves. What right to they have to steal this home from the bank or anyone else. This country still has laws. I foresee another drug house for New York.
I agree that it's a shame there are so many vacant homes when families are living on the streets. But for crying out loud, start a movement to purchase some of these properties and then rent them out low-cost (Not for free, because that will invite abuse and encourage "living off the system"). As for the foreclosures, in a lot of cases it's a matter of people buying outside their means. When I bought my home I deliberately figured a mortgage payment based on what I was paying for rent in low-income housing, and then I looked for a home that fell in that price range. I made less than 16k a year, with a kid. I got my butt out of public housing and into a home of my own, I settled for a fixer-upper when I WANTED better.
The right to free speech and the right to occupy does not include the right to violate the law, period. To advocate the trespassing and theft of a home because "it wasn't being used, and they needed it" is absurd. Practice your guaranteed rights, within the boundaries of the law.
As for the couple, I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they have been seeking employment wherever they could get it and putting forth an honest effort to get back on their feet (although I find it hard to believe they haven't been able to accomplish that in ten years). I will also assume that she was already pregnant with the older child when they became homeless, but it was purely foolish and self-centered to even RISK another pregnancy when they couldn't even provide for themselves. I will not be the least surprised when this family is back on the streets by the end of the week, and will even venture a guess that Mommy and Daddy will end up in jail over this at some point, with those poor kids going to foster care. Wake up people, and use some common sense.
Has anyone else noticed that she is talking on a cell phone? Probably provided for free
Ah yes i did I wonder who pays the bill to?
People posting here have missed the point. The point is that people should be able to live in foreclosed homes. There are many homeless people in this country, and when more layoffs come, you might change your mind about what you post.
I agree with the comments that people should get a job, etc. and I also think that the person who had the house foreclosed should get it back, not some homeless individual.
Remember, though, this is a media smear campaign. I bet the true story is far different from what is being reported.
This reminds of the weapons of mass destruction story the media promoted about Iraq. When the truth came out, what was there and what the media imagined was there was completely different.
Give this story a couple of days. I bet we will find out more as this story evolves.
Don't take things at face value.
Raphael: The point is that people should be able to live in foreclosed homes. Really? And for how long? Until "they're back on their feet"? These two have never had jobs! Face it they've been in shelters since they were 20 and 17. What makes you think they'll ever change?
Read post 61 (above). That is what you get when you let people live for free. No job, no motivation, no attempt to improve and finally you get kids who grow up believing that not working and living on public assistance is normal. I'd bet these two are part of the cycle of generational welfare families...and I give their kids little chance to break out of the cycle.
"The point is that people should be able to live in foreclosed homes."
OK, I'll go with you one that for a minute. I'm a bank, I had six mortgages that have been defaulted on, went through the foreclosure process, and now have six houses that are uninhabited. So, the next step is to sell them as fast as I can and recoup some of my losses. Well, I could rent them out temporarily and have a little bit of rental income prior to the sale, maybe offset some of the missed payments from the people who defaulted on the loan. Then, after the house is sold and the renters are forced to move out I'm going to have costs to clean and repair it prior to the new owners taking possession. Never mind the fact that I gave a family a home only to turn around and boot them out a few weeks/months later. Real nice of me.
The idea is nice in theory, but not practical in reality. Now, if someone with a generous pocket book (or several someones, like all the people who are donating money and such to OWS) was to buy up a few homes that have been foreclosed on and the bank hasn't been able to sell (I'm sure the condition of the home has no bearing whatsoever on the time it sits on the market), and then rent them out, voila! A few families can get off the street. As long as they can afford the rent, which I'm sure will have to be high enough to cover the mortgage payment (yes, there will still be one), and insurance.
It is the sense of entitlement that p***es me off. Just because you are in a tough spot does not give you a right to a free ride. A boost to help pay the rent and buy some groceries, and job training with assistance finding employment: yes, although it should be counted as a privilege, not something you are entitled to just because you are poor. I lived under the poverty threshold with my daughter for four years, so I know what it's like to do without.
Media smear? Are you kidding? The media loves the OWS people.. These homes don't belong to these people. Let the OWS use some of the union money they are sucking up and let them buy the house for this family if they feel so strongly about them having a home..
Why should homeless be able to live in a foreclosed home? The bank has to be able to sell it to pay off as much as the bad loan as they can. If homeless people live in them, then the property value will drop even more and the bank will lose more money.... then the rest of us who are barely hanging on will have to bail them out again.
People should be able to live in foreclosed homes?! Are you insane?
Nobody is entitled to home ownership just for being born. Home ownership is a goal - something you achieve after hard work and good financial planning. Why is it fair for them to move into a free home, while everyone who purchased their own homes still has to pay the mortgage, taxes, interest, insurance, etc. etc. etc.
This home is private property. They need to be arrested. If this was owned by any entity other than I bank, I'm sure you would change your tune.
I can't wait to see the Family Guy/South Park episode about this. Idiots.
Raphael, the problem is if we start letting people who sit around and do nothing have a free house that isn't a very good incentive for the rest of us to get up and go to work Monday morning. You let one homeless family have a house for free and watch the collapse of society as we know it. It's already begun with all of the handouts. Most people in the world are concidered to be well off if they have one car in the family, a color TV, a cell phone, and air conditioning. Most of the people I met when I was doing social work for welfare cases had all of these. Hard to feel sorry for people that are getting so much money in food stamps that they are eating better than you are working your tush off.
I agree with you 100% PradaDota. I would have been much better off financially if I had quit my job and gone on welfare, state medicaid and food stamps (I worked as an aid for a school district, made less than 12K a year, plus child support when it came in). I wouldn't have had the fuel expense to drive back and forth to work, no insurance premiums, and could have stayed home with my daughter and cut out child care costs. But, since I am fully capable of working I stuck with it, and now have a much better position and double the pay. We still do without cable TV and internet access. I have a cell phone with data package so I can keep up with my work e-mail, otherwise I would have basic service. Air conditioning, what's that? People today have no idea how to cut out unnecessary "things" so they can better their lives. I had a friend, I swear, who pulled money out of the scarce grocery budget to pay the satellite bill. Her toddler had to go without milk for almost three weeks until payday so she could watch her Soaps.
Jessica, your story is pretty incredible. I really commend you for your perseverance.
"It's part of a national day of action that we hope will kick off a wave of defenses and home reoccupations," Max Berger, 26, told the Occupy Wall Street General Assembly late last week while requesting $6,400 in funding to buy tools for the project. "This is not just about one event; this is a huge frontier for us. We can do these kinds of actions all the time, and we should. And it doesn't have to be just us. We got to do this one right so we can inspire people to do it theirselves."
Sure Max and what happens when people get tired of donating to your cause? where's the money come from then? One day Max might learn nothing is for free.
That's it. I need a new car so I'm going down to a dealership and sit in a new car until they give it to me. Payments are for the 1% not me.
i have 3 problems with this ---- #1, how about the people who owned the house before it got repossessed ?? ---- seems to me if anyone is going to occupy this house, it should be them. ---- #2, do we really want to establish a precedent where any house that is vacant for any length of item can be taken over by whoever wants to ?? ---- #3, who is paying the property taxes on this house ?? -- seems to me that person or entity should have some say in this.
ronpal, those are three questions that probably haven't even been considered by these people.
Thank's to a Black President, or I guarentee this family would still be on the streets. Only in the current America. Shesssssh
It's not their house to begin with. They are squatting.
Oh, so if we can't pay for it, we just take it, is that what I'm hearing ? And yes give it to someone that's not going to ever work .. The jobs are not there you say it don't have to be a full time job rake someones leaves cut some grass.. it's day jobs out there but people don't want to work. How do i know its day jobs out there Hell I've worked them .. People need to learn you don't take and give nothing back.. Give me my welfare you owe me, Like hell I do !!
If you really want to help people that are homeless start a business that employees low skilled labor and go down to your local shelter to recruit your employees. My guess is that you will not get any takers, but if you do, now you are fixing the homeless situation.
even a benevolent "Robin Hood", is still, by definition, a thief....
and by the way, that is true whether the "Robin Hood" is a person, an organization, or a government.
This is communism pure and simple taking something for someone and giving it to another without any legal right to do so.
and it's still communism even if you change the laws to make it "legal".
These people, as nice as they may be...have absolutely no right to that home. If 'occupy' or any other group wants to be forcing their way into a home and placing a family there it should be the original home owners. So this group is essentially stating that if a family who has defaulted on a loan because they lost their job for some other reason could not make the payments, they have the right to put someone else into their home that cant afford it either?
Im pissed. I pay my mortgage every month, sometimes at the expense of something my family needs. My husband lost his job and is working part time, I work two jobs. But we have good credit, we make our payments and we dont over spend. If we got evicted, like hell Im letting someone else live in my house that I struggled for, for free. Why dont we all just stop paying our mortgages, let occupy and the rest of the loons find us all free housing.
Presumably now, if you own any property that you are not currently using, it can simply be taken by someone who wants to use it. Like, if you turn off your IPOD for a few minutes, it can simply be taken by someone else who wants to have an IPOD. After all, you weren't using it. And, law enforcement will not take any action. Why, we might not even need police anymore. What a transformational idea!
Why is MSNBC PROMOTING the law being broke? OH I forget that anything this liberal trash prints is okay as long as it is THEIR idea. Where are the Police to incarcerate those from the occupy law breakers and those living illegally in a house that is NOT theirs? Why is it as long as you are holding your hand out, it is OKAY to break the law while those that obey the rules are criticized for do so???????