Article: "Debunking Portland..."

[karlsch]

Even Sam Adams, hardly an evil libertarian, concedes that Portland has serious employment problems in spite of all of the planning.
A great place to live, not work

His solution seems to be more planning.

Urban planners love trendy buzz terms like "the college educated creative class." When they see college educated people flocking to their cities they think that they are being invaded by creative people. They don't realize that acquiring a BA or BS degree does not automatically make a person creative.

[roneb]

Originally Posted by angelbug

You don't understand...there is no discourse left in this country. People only read and accept information that already fits their currently held, preconceived notions. It's the reason this country is so polarized right now. One side listens to the right and the other takes everything in Huff Post as gospel, and the wedge is driven in further and further. The idea that both sides might have something to offer and something to discard is a forgotten concept anymore.

The response to this also points up one of the reasons I decided against relocating to Portland (though there were many). Portlanders seem to turn a blind eye to their city's problems. When I told my friends there that I was moving somewhere else, they asked why. I said, "The housing prices are lower, the weather is better, my property taxes will be half, there is no state income tax, it's close to a huge National Park, there's no traffic, it's an artsy community, I have friends there, my house will back up to 250 acres of wooded trails, the CSA farm is right down the street, it's quiet, and the town is right on the ocean." "But what's there? Won't you have to (gasp!!!) DRIVE to the grocery store?" Ok, I get that they think Portland is God's gift to cities, and if I had to live in one, it's the one I would choose - I like the city a lot. But like parents who refuse to see their children's faults, too many Portlanders seem to have almost a defensive posture in defending the place against any observation that it's not perfect.

Excellent post; particularly the last point. Sorry I can't rep you again.

[figmalt]

So the article is written by the CATO institute, but there were a lot of good, and frankly, true statements about urban planning in the area. It's easy as a recent transplant to Portland to say, "Oh, Portland is wonderful, Trimet is wonderful, it's so walkable, so bikeable, look at the Tram! etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum." But in reality, Trimet is really only well suited to get people around Portland. If you're coming from the west or east of the Metro area, it takes way too long. They have insufficient parking at the places that matter most, and they planned it that way (see article TriMet wants you to ride, not park | Washington County News - – OregonLive.com).

There has been tremendous unaccountability (TRAM!!!) with developments in the area, not to mention the city holding it's citizens hostage with threats to release prisoners unless they pass certain measures, etc. I really don't want to bag on Portland, because it's a great city in a lot of ways. But neither is it productive, especially for people who have no history with the city, to turn a blind eye to its many problems. Read the article, do your own research, and make up your own mind. It's called being a well educated consumer.

[John Shaft]

Portland: The city that works for $10/hr. Or is unemployed.

[philwithbeard]

Originally Posted by figmalt

..... But neither is it productive, especially for people who have no history with the city, to turn a blind eye to its many problems. Read the article, do your own research, and make up your own mind. It's called being a well educated consumer.

Figmalt:

And did you read the rebuttal posted by Nick614????

At least I read enough of the original posted article to realize it was bogus and a paid for hatchet job with gross errors in rhetorical logic.

Here, let me re-post the rebuttal for you again:
Debunking Cato

Phil

[figmalt]

Yes, I read the rebuttal. That's my point: I READ BOTH SIDES OF THE STORY AND MAKE UP MY OWN MIND. Both sides have an agenda, I'm not going to just ignore one because I disagree with them philosophically. That's what being an 'open-minded' person is. But I've also lived the life in and around the city, paid taxes, and watched the story unfold for the better part of fifteen years, which gives depth and context to both articles.

[LeftCoastee]

Originally Posted by philwithbeard

Figmalt:

And did you read the rebuttal posted by Nick614????

At least I read enough of the original posted article to realize it was bogus and a paid for hatchet job with gross errors in rhetorical logic.

Here, let me re-post the rebuttal for you again:
Debunking Cato

Phil

The rebuttal is by CNU (Congress for the New Urbanism) so its not exactly objective. This would be like using an article written by Keith Olbermann to refute something Glenn Beck said.