Has increased ethnic diversity improved the quality of life of Minneapolis/Minnesota? (St. Paul: to rent, high crime)

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

First, the Borders is closing because Barnes and Noble has a much better location on Nicollet and B&N is a much more competitive company. Nobody went to Block E for books, they made a bad move going into that location ten years ago. It isn't downtown's fault.
Second, Block E is an exception to Downtown. Nicollet is still pretty strong, there is continual development throughout the area. There are a plethora of new hotels, resturants, bars and other places that have opened. The city's theaters are all still there. Obviously, there is enough people who could care less about free parking to support these places.
Parking is free if you patronize a store that will validate parking, and there isn't a big problem with cars being broken into. Go spend $20 at Target, you can sit your car in a ramp all night.
Downtown is where most of the activity is in the metropolitan area. If you think going to The Galleria is a night on the town, you are very "mature" and your night will end after an 8:00 movie.
Minneapolis did have a much more dense downtown in the 50s', but everyone destroyed that so they could have free parking. You can't have it both ways. In the 50s'; skid row went most of the way along Hennepin. The buildings were still there, just nobody in them sober.
I don't know why you seem nostalgic for the mid-eighties. Most of downtown then looked like Block E now. That was rock bottom, the crime rate was much worse. Most of the department stores were a year or two from closing. Borders would have been the least of their problems.
I won't defend Block E. On the whole, though, downtown is about as good now than it has been in 50 years.

This has nothing to do with the thread!

[Minnehahapolitan]

Originally Posted by Fred Finster

Something is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay wrong in downtown Minneapolis. Block E is a gigantic police call, just like was when there was the Rand Hotel, that turkey-is-king cafe, where you could get a whole turkey dinner really cheap; Shinders with its great card collections, Moby Dicks bar and the other bars, Rifle Sport. In fact it had MORE business from regular folks slumming, the decadents and tourists. So the cops were always there. They're always at the new Block E. Before--making money. After--losing money.

Add to that the big Borders on the corner is closing. It's a disaster area. NO AMOUNT OF MONEY WILL SAVE IT. It will take two things that the Downtown Chamber of Commerce doesn't have--intelligence and innovation.

Mature people don't talk about "going downtown" to a night out any more. If they want a night out, they can park their car for FREE, not have it broken into or stolen and can find it easily by going to a cafe in the burbs.

The only other night life destination in Minneapolis is UPTOWN. But you'd be going there to get drunk or go to a movie show or comedy club and then get drunk.

Downtown and Uptown "WERE" places to go up until around 1985, when the greedy landowners wanted more rent money.

You want to see a great downtown Minneapolis, go look at a photo book of downtown in the 50s! Fabulous!

Neither does this.

[Camden Northsider]

Yes and no, but what about the increased migrations of whites from areas of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Michigan, etc...why don't we ever hear about all of the South Dakota license plates you see everywhere here, hasn't this had an impact on our quality of life?

Truth be told, the cities are very segregated and I don't see much in the way of improvements in this area save for a few neighborhoods. Even in Camden, a highly integrated area/ ZIP code, the area itself is still fairly segregated sometimes within individual neighborhoods and their streets. On this forum, you constantly see posts everywhere in which you will find both overt as well as highly subtle/ subversive racial connotations throughout that speak to fear and prejudice more than anything. Minnesota touts its reputation as being an open and accepting state, but in reality there are huge issues here (as with most other states but there are many places in the south and east that are much more progressive in this area) - why can't minnesotans of all creeds make the leap towards living and working together and trying to understand one another?

Going back to the OP, I would say very much so "yes" to Minneapolis but that maybe a better question would be "should increased ethnic diversity improve the quality of life here?" (also "yes"). The problem, however, or reason that I would say both "yes and no", lies not in the increased ethnic diversity itself or persons of color that have chosen to reside here, but rather that any decrease in quality of life is likely more telling of the hearts, minds, and decisions of white Minnesotans here choosing to avoid diversity. here's an interesting cartoon depiction, taken from Twin Cities Housing.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Yes and no, but what about the increased migrations of whites from areas of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Michigan, etc...why don't we ever hear about all of the South Dakota license plates you see everywhere here, hasn't this had an impact on our quality of life?

Truth be told, the cities are very segregated and I don't see much in the way of improvements in this area save for a few neighborhoods. Even in Camden, a highly integrated area/ ZIP code, the area itself is still fairly segregated sometimes within individual neighborhoods and their streets. On this forum, you constantly see posts everywhere in which you will find both overt as well as highly subtle/ subversive racial connotations throughout that speak to fear and prejudice more than anything. Minnesota touts its reputation as being an open and accepting state, but in reality there are huge issues here (as with most other states but there are many places in the south and east that are much more progressive in this area) - why can't minnesotans of all creeds make the leap towards living and working together and trying to understand one another?

Going back to the OP, I would say very much so "yes" to Minneapolis but that maybe a better question would be "should increased ethnic diversity improve the quality of life here?" (also "yes"). The problem, however, or reason that I would say both "yes and no", lies not in the increased ethnic diversity itself or persons of color that have chosen to reside here, but rather that any decrease in quality of life is likely more telling of the hearts, minds, and decisions of white Minnesotans here choosing to avoid diversity. here's an interesting cartoon depiction, taken from Twin Cities Housing.

Sounds like most major cities in the USA. And by the way, I live in the south and I'm not that impressed. If MPLS has people who are trying to avoid diversity, so do many other major cities. Alot of residents in Atlanta fled to the suburbs(at alarming rates for a city that says it's "too busy to hate") to avoid blacks. Some residents are moving into the city of Atlanta, hence, a population increase, but that cartoon sounds almost like most major cities. This is happening all over the USA.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte

Sounds like most major cities in the USA. And by the way, I live in the south and I'm not that impressed. If MPLS has people who are trying to avoid diversity, so do many other major cities. Alot of residents in Atlanta fled to the suburbs(at alarming rates for a city that says it's "too busy to hate") to avoid blacks. Some residents are moving into the city of Atlanta, hence, a population increase, but that cartoon sounds almost like most major cities. This is happening all over the USA.

The "white flight" phenomenon is of course everywhere in the US and has been going on for the better part of the last century. What I find bothersome is the completely perverse- shirking of all responsibility- manifest destiny/ laissez faire attitude around white flight in this country - you would think whites' avoidance of non-whites to be a natural phenomenon, that it was almost "god's will" that the countryside around all major urban centers in America become cultivated for miles around with the chemically-treated green turfs of the (majoritarily) great white american dream.

The urban centers and city neighborhoods that get left in the wake undoubtedly suffer - property values plummet in areas deemed "undesirable", businesses and amenities leave (or lose a large customer base) paving the way for predatory businesses to set up shop, local schools often suffer and de facto segregation occurs. This is not to deny the fact that many nonwhite areas throughout American history have flourished/ prospered completely on their own and continue to do so today (like suburban areas of DC and Atlanta); but in my humble (and yet still preach-y) opinion, American cities would be in a better position if more white Americans actually valued diversity/ cultures other than their own and held themselves to a higher level of social responsibility.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

The "white flight" phenomenon is of course everywhere in the US and has been going on for the better part of the last century. What I find bothersome is the completely perverse- shirking of all responsibility- manifest destiny/ laissez faire attitude around white flight in this country - you would think whites' avoidance of non-whites to be a natural phenomenon, that it was almost "god's will" that the countryside around all major urban centers in America become cultivated for miles around with the chemically-treated green turfs of the (majoritarily) great white american dream.

The urban centers and city neighborhoods that get left in the wake undoubtedly suffer - property values plummet in areas deemed "undesirable", businesses and amenities leave (or lose a large customer base) paving the way for predatory businesses to set up shop, local schools often suffer and de facto segregation occurs. This is not to deny the fact that many nonwhite areas throughout American history have flourished/ prospered completely on their own and continue to do so today (like suburban areas of DC and Atlanta); but in my humble (and yet still preach-y) opinion, American cities would be in a better position if more white Americans actually valued diversity/ cultures other than their own and held themselves to a higher level of social responsibility.

I am not much of a fan of laissez-faire when it comes to "white flight", but the more I look at it, you can't "make" anyone want to live around minorities. People have to want to do(or at least say, it doesn't matter what race you are, if you want to live here, I'm not going to stop you and I'm not going to leave because I hope we can be good neighbors.). I am starting to think "well, if you don't want to live around me, a black man, then leave because I'm not going anywhere. Go back to your little hole with the rest of your bigots and I'll find people who don't care what race I am". Sadly, there is nothing that can be done outside of Draconian laws saying "you have to live here or here". I do agree that if diversity was valued(or at least not hated), then people wouldn't feel the need to flee anywhere, but sadly, not everyone thinks that way.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte

...but the more I look at it, you can't "make" anyone want to live around minorities. People have to want to do(or at least say, it doesn't matter what race you are, if you want to live here, I'm not going to stop you and I'm not going to leave because I hope we can be good neighbors.).

Yes, it is unfortunate that you can't "make" anyone live anywhere , but I think your attitude is right on with your statement in the parenthesis.

Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte

Sadly, there is nothing that can be done outside of Draconian laws saying "you have to live here or here".

Minneapolis/ St. Paul actually have some creative incentives in place to encourage first time homebuyers to live in the cities proper- there's a program called "City Living" that will help cover I believe down payment and/or closing costs and provide a below market interest rate for persons that (1) meet income guidelines (which aren't super low like a lot of programs) and (2) plan to be an owner/occupier of a home in the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. There are other catches to it, however- if you sell within a certain time frame(and/ or your income increases dramatically w/in that time frame), and make a profit on the sale you have to pay a percentage back or something or another. But I do think more creative strategies like this should be in place, promoted, and funded to encourage homebuyers to invest and live within city limits. There are similarly many neighborhood (NRP and other) funds available in Mpls to provide below market interest rate loans to neighborhood residents for home improvements.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Yes, it is unfortunate that you can't "make" anyone live anywhere , but I think your attitude is right on with your statement in the parenthesis.



Minneapolis/ St. Paul actually have some creative incentives in place to encourage first time homebuyers to live in the cities proper- there's a program called "City Living" that will help cover I believe down payment and/or closing costs and provide a below market interest rate for persons that (1) meet income guidelines (which aren't super low like a lot of programs) and (2) plan to be an owner/occupier of a home in the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. There are other catches to it, however- if you sell within a certain time frame(and/ or your income increases dramatically w/in that time frame), and make a profit on the sale you have to pay a percentage back or something or another. But I do think more creative strategies like this should be in place, promoted, and funded to encourage homebuyers to invest and live within city limits. There are similarly many neighborhood (NRP and other) funds available in Mpls to provide below market interest rate loans to neighborhood residents for home improvements.

My BIL/SIL bought a house on the West side of St. Paul under a program like this. They were supposed to turn around their entire neighborhood. The program remodeled their house before they moved in, gave them a great interest rate, etc. Well, after they bought their house the program folded and nothing else was done. They now have a beautiful house surrounded by drug dealers--great program. Fortunately for them them their 10 years are up but the chances of them selling are slim and it will probably revert back to a rental property anyway. Now they are taking a cute house in Highland Park and renovating that into an ugly house, but that is another story.

[nick is rulz]

how is the neighborhood becoming worse the fault of the assistance program they enrolled in?

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by nick is rulz

how is the neighborhood becoming worse the fault of the assistance program they enrolled in?

It isn't and that is the point. There are these 'programs' and they aren't helping. Their program wasn't income dependent, just someone that would agree to live there 10 years or more. It was supposed to revitalize the west side of St. Paul, didn't happen.