What's with all the hate on "Hipsters" and "Yuppies" in NYC? (New York: house, theater)

[SeventhFloor]

Originally Posted by Guywithacause

Well for the record I find prices to be completely out of wack ESPECIALLY in places like Mott Haven where prices WERE pegged to the amount of income the home would generate, and not on the "fabulousness/trendiness/safety/luxury premium that many neighborhoods had. However, that has changed and now there are premiums on Mott Haven homes, and the prices are no longer tied to income...so the fact remains that if I were to buy into Mott Haven in 2008 I AM, for all intents and purposes, already priced out. Although I can LIVE in many other areas in the city, the only place I can AFFORD to live, in the lifestyle I desire, is in Mott Haven.

I am painfully aware of what is occuring, and I am also well aware that Hipsters are an easy target for blame, but are in no way the problem....anymore than people of color moving into a white community are the cause of their deterioration/destruction.

no i mean priced out as in you cant afford to live there based on your income, not what the market dictates. like literally after you pay bills you cannot pay rent/mortgage. forget market value. and due to mott haven's proximity to manhattan, it is inevitable.

[NooYowkur81]

Originally Posted by SeventhFloor

no i mean priced out as in you cant afford to live there based on your income, not what the market dictates. like literally after you pay bills you cannot pay rent/mortgage. forget market value. and due to mott haven's proximity to manhattan, it is inevitable.

Maybe he can pay off his mortgage before that happens.

[Guywithacause]

Yes I understood what you meant, which is why I do not live in most other areas in the city..b/c I would not be able to make ends meet....that is one of the reasons I chose to stay in Mott Haven. And I also know that ALL, as in ALL, of my neighbors could not afford to buy the homes they are living in, and I don't even think their kids/grandkids are in any position to do so either..which is even scarier.

I am well aware of what being prices out means, and I am priced out of most areas in this city....yet I am not on here complaining about it. I live where I live...I've made compromises..and in all likelihood had I decided to just move to Mott Haven in 2008, I would be borderline able to afford the kind of lifestyle I want....so I know the deal.

[SeventhFloor]

as long as you understand.....because i think the main idea of this thread is really not hate towards hipsters, yuppies, etc, its about being priced out. which is unfortunate......

[Guywithacause]

I think the main idea of the thread is about misplaced anger, and Hipsters being an easy/the latest target of whatever ails the city these days.

[drkman]

Originally Posted by cyrusjul

Is laughable how some people prefer to keep criminals and wannabe gangsters in these neighborhoods, instead of the new and less criminal people moving in. Lets face it, some of you have issues with whites faces who seem to be doing ok and better financially than many people in those hoods. The thing that bothers me, is while the New York Times pointed out that most well-to-do people (Yuppies?) moving to Harlem tend to be Black themselves, alot of you seem to hate the White ones the most. Racism is alive and well. Fine you don't like their style or music, but lets face it, they are paying a good amount of taxes and are less likely to be involve in crime. I want a neighbor like that. Who doesn't?

Oh and the ones been displace are the renters, not property owners. Alot of the Blacks in Harlem who owned before gentrification are probably happy of the change and probably the ones in Bed-Stuy will be aswell. Stores? there will always be plenty of places for shopping and stores. Starbucks and the like, can't take all the spaces. Some property owners with retail have to be realistic.

Oh and do any of you have sympathy for all those struggling artists who were living in SoHo, Tribeca, or the East Village back before gentrification in those neighborhoods took place aswell? I guess not, since they are probably white.

Considering that New York City is a city of renters, those being displaced would most likely be the majority of the neighborhood. And I do not recall anyone saying they wanted to keep criminals and wannabe gangsters in their neighborhood. If someone is upset about rising costs in their neighborhood that is forcing them out of their neighborhoods, and forcing establishments that they have frequented over the years out of their neighborhood, then those long time residents have a right to have their voice heard.

The East Villiage, SoHo and Tribeca has nothing to do with this because people were talking about specific areas that happen to have a minority majority. Personally, I do bemoan the East Village as I do know people who were priced out of the area and it is not an area that I enjoy being in for an extended period of time anymore. Not because of the changes but due to the overabundance of changes that have occured in that area. Same as I bemoan some of the changes or closing of establishments in Harlem.

Let me put it in this perspective, growing up in various neighborhoods (predominately Black) in the city, I have always lived around people that were doing well financially, doing poorly financially, just holding their own etc. That was just the farbric of the neighborhoods. Nobody really looked down or thought that someone with less financial means did not have the right to be in the neighborhood, and because these were black neighborhoods, major stores were not rushing to get into them, regardless of the income those stores could have generated. Nobody considered their neighbors criminals unless their was a valid reason for thinking of them like that. And to be honest, you basically knew who were the criminals in your area.

I believe that most people want their neighborhoods to be better, renters as well as owners. That is not the issue. New establishments moving in that cater to the neighborhood, no problem. That is something that we all want. The problem comes with the re-creation of a neighborhood that does not reflect the reality of the people that live there. That is the issue. I recall seeing an artists rendition of downtown Brooklyn once the new mall that is planned is built. This rendition had people walking around, holding hands, shopping, looking very happy. The problem with this rendition was that none (that I could see) of the people that were represented were minorities. And this is basically a shopping area that minorities frequent and have sustained over the years. Is this progress? What that rendering represented too me is that the vision of this wonderful new shopping mecca was not one for minorities. The same type of issues was with the rendering of Coney Island. We are going to build it up, but not for the people who has sustained the area or the economy of the area, but for the more affluent people that we want to be here. Build it and they will come.

As far as the Yuppies, Buppies whatever. I have lived in those areas or around those types of people and believe me, it is not something that I would want to do again. Beautiful apartments but the people in the buidling were a piece of work. Neighborhoods that have a mixture of people on the socio economic scale are much more comfortable too me.

[Guywithacause]

I agree with the essence of your post, and I also agree that neighborhoods that have a mixture of people on the socio-economic scale are much more comfortable to me and are healthier too. But what has occured in places like Mott Haven is that these communities do NOT have a healthy mixture of anything..just extreme poverty. And any attempts to diversify the area, socially, demographically, economically, are met with anger, and verbal assaults, angry tirades, and hate.

So when they build homes that would appeal to others besides the destitute, the neighborhood complains....should we only build homes for the poor then? When there is an establishment that caters to a different clientele...people scream gentrification....but must we ONLY have fried chicken shops and 99 cent stores? When new faces are seen in the community people yell "get out" and "you are ruining the area" etc....so why can't other people live there too? How do any of these shortsighted, and ignorant attitudes get us to a diversified and healthier balance?

Please provide some recommendations.

[NYCexpat]

Originally Posted by Guywithacause

I think the main idea of the thread is about misplaced anger, and Hipsters being an easy/the latest target of whatever ails the city these days.

Wow, I can't believe this thread is still going. But when this thread was on topic, Guywhithacause has summed things up perfectly.
Blaming one subculture group for rising housing costs in NYC is a joke. The real estate market has been rising at high rates for 20+ years now. And a few spoiled suburban transplants just do not have the buying power to cause that change.
As far as the hipsters in particular being snooty. Well that may be the case, but I would take snooty over scary (gangsters) any day. At least the hipster subculture is art/style based vs. violence/anger based.
Of course NYC could turn into SF and a bunch of hippies could be running all over the place with their misguided progressive attitude. Again I'd take the hipsters. Doesn't someone have to be cool even if it isn't us?

[drkman]

Originally Posted by Guywithacause

I agree with the essence of your post, and I also agree that neighborhoods that have a mixture of people on the socio-economic scale are much more comfortable to me and are healthier too. But what has occured in places like Mott Haven is that these communities do NOT have a healthy mixture of anything..just extreme poverty. And any attempts to diversify the area, socially, demographically, economically, are met with anger, and verbal assaults, angry tirades, and hate.

So when they build homes that would appeal to others besides the destitute, the neighborhood complains....should we only build homes for the poor then? When there is an establishment that caters to a different clientele...people scream gentrification....but must we ONLY have fried chicken shops and 99 cent stores? When new faces are seen in the community people yell "get out" and "you are ruining the area" etc....so why can't other people live there too? How do any of these shortsighted, and ignorant attitudes get us to a diversified and healthier balance?

Please provide some recommendations.

Guy, I think that the change will probably come but it may take longer in an area like Mott Haven. I think the poverty level is around 50% in that area and it will take a mass effort on the part of the community to help continue the change that is occuring in the neighborhood. A mixture of people with different socio economic backgrounds would really help out as it would show more and more people the power of education and the power of being financially stable. Also a mixture of people that are not scared to speak too the ones that are causing the neighborhood to stagnant would go a long way. I would hope that the revitalization that is going on in the area is doing it in a way that the people in the neighborhood could benefit from.

My issue is not with new people moving into a neighborhood. It is more with why couldn't this happen before and why couldn't it benefit the people that lived there. Why do we have to leave our neighborhood to experience a decent sit down restaurant, or a nice lounge? I am not into Starbucks but why couldn't a nice coffee shop open up in the area that caters to the people that live there. Not to generalize but in Mott Haven, why not have a coffee shop that sells really good espresso, cappucino, coffee, muffins, flan etc. Something maybe by the train station or a main street that is heavily traveled. Why does it have to wait for the area to have new residents before it happens? That is what is troubling too me, not that it is happening but why couldn't it happen before. A whole avenue of 99 cent stores and Fried Chicken places is not good but why is it that those are the only businesses that would come into the neighborhood. Is this the fault of the new residents? No, of course not. I think it is more due to people being unable to get small business loans to open up a business in an area that challenges the status quo. Can these places succeed? Of course they can, as long as the prices remain affordable for the people in the neighborhood. I mean, it took a long while before Harlem got it's Pathmark but it appears to be thriving, due to the people in the area being starved for a big supermarket.

I don't think that rents should stay ridiculously low in these areas either, but I do think that there should be a mixture of rental properties that are affordable to people. I know it's very common for people to have roommates to share expenses but I think that should be more of a personal choice that is made instead of a necessity in order to maintain.

[UpsonDowns]

Originally Posted by NYCexpat

Wow, I can't believe this thread is still going. But when this thread was on topic, Guywhithacause has summed things up perfectly.
Blaming one subculture group for rising housing costs in NYC is a joke. The real estate market has been rising at high rates for 20+ years now. And a few spoiled suburban transplants just do not have the buying power to cause that change.
As far as the hipsters in particular being snooty. Well that may be the case, but I would take snooty over scary (gangsters) any day. At least the hipster subculture is art/style based vs. violence/anger based.
Of course NYC could turn into SF and a bunch of hippies could be running all over the place with their misguided progressive attitude. Again I'd take the hipsters. Doesn't someone have to be cool even if it isn't us?

As a buppie, I usually stay out of these conversations, but tonight I came home to a mob of frat/preppie types outside of an old theater/church/concert venue in Washington Heights and I was shocked by how uncomfortable the crowd made me feel. As a black woman, I've realized that drunken (white) dudes in madras plaid pants and untucked Oxford shirts scare me more than the wannabe gangsters I pass on the street every day. They all looked a little too Robert Chambers for my taste. (Does that reference make me really old?)