where does "West Lakeview" end and Roscoe Village begin? (Chicago: employment, neighborhood)

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

So say we keep moving to the extremes - super wealthy, super poor. What is going to be the motivation of someone getting to Lincoln Park every day from Aurora (I'm being dramatic here) just to make minimum wage? Not much.

And what's going to be the motivation of the super poor from refraining sticking it in the neck of the super rich when there's no hope of moving to a prosperous middle position? American political stability was built on upward mobility for all (or at least a reasonable hope of such).

[Avengerfire]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

And what's going to be the motivation of the super poor from refraining sticking it in the neck of the super rich when there's no hope of moving to a prosperous middle position? American political stability was built on upward mobility for all (or at least a reasonable hope of such).

Heck, the super poor will even stick it in the neck of the lower and middle middle class persons if the sh*@ hits the fan.

The well earning upper middle class/upper class yuppies should want more middle class people around because they serve as a buffer at the very least and a possible ally if class wars ignite.

[Avengerfire]

And for perspective look at this:

http://www.susandosemagen.com/chicago/map.jpg (broken link)

Middle Class in Chicago (http://www.susandosemagen.com/chicago/ - broken link)

There is a heck of a lot more red now. A little more blue and a whole less green.

[Chi-town Native]

that map is pretty frightening. I have to check out the stats used later on, I hope it's been manipulated for effect...

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

And what's going to be the motivation of the super poor from refraining sticking it in the neck of the super rich when there's no hope of moving to a prosperous middle position? American political stability was built on upward mobility for all (or at least a reasonable hope of such).

not much more than it is now, hence the private security guards, gated complexes, etc. we increasingly see.

[Larry Siegel]

This discussion is getting a little overheated. Roscoe Village or whatever you want to call it is a middle to upper middle class neighborhood. The super rich wouldn't be caught dead there - never heard of it on their way from Kensington (London) to East Hampton to Maui - and the super poor have no interest in going there to spend $6 on a latte.

As far as I am concerned, Chicago is ten times nicer than it was at the low point in the early seventies when people like me (white people from out of town) were told, correctly, not to stray more than four blocks from the lake and not to go south of Randolph at all. Roscoe Village is just one of many examples of the improvement.

I do know about the vast stretches of the south and west sides that have not improved or that have gotten worse. That is a topic for another day.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by Larry Siegel

This discussion is getting a little overheated.

Interesting characterization of a discussion that ended three years ago.

[marothisu]

The elusive bug strikes again!

[baileyvpotter]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

What a lot of transplants never seem to understand is that many existing (def. not all) Chicagoans were working at that for decades & did so through bad economic times when others fled to the burbs.

Increased property values are not only meaningless, they're destructive if they reflect speculation (the current housing market should be a clue here).

People who improve schools, volunteer in their neighborhoods, raise kids who are good citizens, etc. - these are people who are improving neighborhoods. Magically deciding the 1700 block of W. Belmont is now "Roscoe Village" by putting up a blinkin' sign is the epitome of not getting it.

And what on earth makes you think working class people don't improve their houses? As someone who has put an insane amount of sweat equity into mine, don't even think of telling me I haven't improved my home. I've planted trees, had dozens of trees planted on surrounding blocks, phone in graffiti on at least a monthly basis, etc.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

You're getting defensive about a rational reply to your misguided bashing of City residents that pre-date the housing boom?
You've made a few false assumptions:
1) my father is a lawyer, owns his own business. I certainly understand how hard the work is. This is completely irrelevant to the fact that societies don't function without the traditional blue collar job base.

Proof? What do you think would be a bigger problem, the city without cops, teachers, firemen & garbagemen, or the city without advertising executives & lawyers?

2) your assessment of our educational system, to be charitable, is oversimplified.
there are definitely examples of local schools that have turned around in the newly-gentrified areas.
And without exception, the initial hard work was done by a small determined band of parents, usually many years before people started moving to the neighborhood because of the school. It's a pretty clear chicken-and-the-egg thing.
And there are also loads of schools in newly-gentrified areas that, to be charitable, suck. So, there goes that argument.
You came to Chicago for a reason - the people are a part of it. Without us, and OUR taxes, that infrastructure crumbled decades ago.

I was raised by well-educated people (both graduates of Washington University) who moved to Chicago in 1967, in Lincoln Park.
My dad was a fixer-upper type, we lived in a two-flat in Lake View bought in 1970, he sold to one of the first duplex-rehabbers in our area in 1992.

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

Yuppies generally don't sit out on the stoop and their kids don't play lineball and fast pitching (but then maybe no kids do that anymore). They're not very "old neighborhood" kind'a people. And once they take over a neighborhood it's easier to find a place to get "gourmet" cupcakes than a gallon of milk. Or is that a Youth Ghetto thing as opposed to a strictly Yuppie kind'a thing?

On the other hand a Yuppie neighborhod is certainly preferable to a slum. But what I liked was an old neighborhood like Austin in the 50s and 60s that was a relaxed mix of classes, occupations and ethnicities. Back when the people who would today be referred to as Yuppies were just regular guys with white collar jobs. And didn't have the brand names of their clothing ostentatiously displayed on it.

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Your arguments (I note you can't/won't answer mine) are predicated on the assumption that the new-and-improved neighborhood will be enjoyed by all.
But that's not how it works. Your idea of good (higher property taxes=better services) is not shared by the massive swath of our population that is either retired or works in fields where raises/COLAs or rare or minimal at best. For these folks even modest property tax increases are crushing.

All it does is justify the City jacking up your taxes (which should be based on the levy & good services), which all the good little sheep accepted and even encouraged, as it shooed the old-timers out of the neighborhood and meant the developers could put up those god-awful anti-social (see Tom's note on stoop life) McCondos.

What you're really saying is "what is wrong with having well educated, well financed neighbors who are going to improve their property, improve the surrounding neighborhood and in general, make an area more desirable to live in for people like themselves?"

Here's the deal - if existing Chicagoans are so horrible, don't move by us. We don't want your vision of Chicago-as-Manhattan, so certainly don't feign shock when your attempts to bulldoze us out of our long-established neighborhoods where we went to school, to church, have family & friends, are met with scorn and derision.

The key, key distinction being people who moved in the City purely for work opportunities, and had no plans whatsoever to stay and raise families here. White flight of the 70s likely was on everyone's mind back then.
But after a while, some of these folks decided to stick around, realizing the City has a lot to offer, not to mention increased gridlock every year has made that commute to the burbs a nightmare nobody ever imagined in the 70s.
Again - I could not be any more happy with good decent folks who move into Chicago and want to be a part of the City, to live, work, play, and raise families. I have new neighbors from all over the place, and the vast majority are great.

But I do take huge umbrage at people who see Chicago as a playground/meat-market to drunkenly spend their 20s and 30s and don't have a clue in terms of how the City needs to work for people of all ages, from birth to death. The City doesn't exist just to provide bored, lonely suburbanites a place to get drunk & laid. If you want to be a Chicagoan, you need to take the bad with the good, you can't simply push what you don't like somewhere else without getting some push back.

^^^^Read the entire thread and although these posts^^^ are almost 3 years old - they are worth
repeating. Also, I didn't realize that some college educated professionals are now considered "blue collar"
such as teachers.

[ChicagoMeO]

same thing when people live in Uptown, but they dont want to be associate with Uptown, so they have nice names for parts of it like Margate Park.

Nothing wrong with yuppies, except when they walk down the street with those oversize baby strollers and feel entitled to take up the whole sidewalk and wont move for you walking toward them.