Beyond Chron: Oakland, A tale of two cities (Long Beach, Fresno: college, income)

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

You fail to realize that Oakland's problem is DOUBLE the national average

And so therefore Oaklanders shouldnt frequent new restaurants and bars that open up in town because that signifies that they are burying their heads with reference to crime?

You have failed miserably to correlate enjoying ourselves and being aware of crime.

LOL

[Malloric]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

This is absolutely pertinent to this thread because Oakland is a tale of two cities and you have a long standing penchant for focusing on just one side of Oakland as if that defines the entire city--even going so far as to imply that Compton is now more desirable than Oakland because they have lowered their crime rate, which begs the question: Would you therefore rather live in Compton over anywhere in Oakland?

Of course he does, but no more than you have a penchant for focusing on just one side of Oakland as if that defines the entire city. Oakland has a significantly worse violent crime rate than Compton. Yes, you can chose to look at only once side of Oakland as you do. Growing up in Stockton, I get that. As long as the crime and human misery stays on "that side" of town, it's tempting to just ignore it since it doesn't effect me. It is, however, the wrong approach to take. Asking pointedly stupid, irrelevant questions that prove just how badly you want and how deeply entrenched your are in ignoring the other side of Oakland does not help your argument.

All a "NO" answer means is that you would rather live in a yuppie neighborhood in Oakland, which is to say it means absolutely nothing at all. But for every crime and every bit of human misery not occurring in the side of Oakland you don't ignore means there just more crime and misery occurring in the side of Oakland that we shall pretend does not exist. We've got some great new restaurants here, so who cares that the total violent crime in ALL of Oakland is higher than Compton. It's not that high in my yuppie part of Oakland, so why should I care that it's that much higher in that other side?

Sacramento does the same thing Oakland does. It sweeps the nasty dirty side under the carpet. We've got hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on marinas and luxury hotels for the lobbyists doing business around the capitol. Meanwhile mental health clinics are closing, the homeless are driven from tent city to tent city. Affordable housing is swamped with years of wait lists, but instead of spending what little money there for affordable housing on affordable housing we spend tens of millions remodeling historic buildings that now provide FEWER units than they did before the renovation. But it's okay to spend over $10 million of affordable housing funds to remove each unit of affordable housing because it's a historic building in the part of Sacramento that isn't ignored a few blocks from the Capitol and next to the tax-payer funded luxury hotels. That's just where Sacramento's priorities are.

Compton doesn't really have a yuppie side to it. Since the Compton riots, it really hasn't had an opportunity to sweep that other side under the rug and pretend it doesn't exist. I mean, everyone knows that economically marginalized side of Oakland doesn't matter, right. We've got a new Italian restaurant. And that's all that matters.

[DocGoldstein]

Oakland Graduation rate for the entire district for 2011: 58.9%

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

You fail to realize that Oakland's problem is DOUBLE the national average, but more importantly, this thread is about OAKLAND, not New Orleans, not San Francisco, but about OAKLAND lol. Montclair didn't read the article, so he/she didn't realize what he/she actually posted. If people read the the article they wouldn't be criticizing people for critiquing Oakland's problems.

Like I said before, if I posted an article about San Francisco's homeless problem, wouldn't you think I'm crazy if I criticized members who then talk about the homeless problem?

This thread isn't about the NATION either yet here you are comparing it. I don't see why you have a problem with people using other cities to compare Oakland to when that is what you and everyone else does all the time. It's not like Oakland exists in a vacuum. You've said it numerous times before that Oakland isn't anything special when compared to places like SF. It's just bizarre that it's okay for YOU to constantly compare Oakland to other cities to prove your point but other's shouldn't.

You sure can compare Oakland to other cities to criticize it yet when people compare Oakland to other cities to show it's not some unique, one-of-a-kind situation then that all of a suddenly isn't allowed. At least try to be fair.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

And so therefore Oaklanders shouldnt frequent new restaurants and bars that open up in town because that signifies that they are burying their heads with reference to crime?

You have failed miserably to correlate enjoying ourselves and being aware of crime.

LOL

I never said or implied that Oaklanders shouldn't go to new restaurants or bars. Once again, please read the article that YOU posted lol.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Malloric

Of course he does, but no more than you have a penchant for focusing on just one side of Oakland as if that defines the entire city.

LOL.The difference is I dont define the entire city based on its positives--that's not possible for a rational person. But its ironic that outsiders feel they are qualified to tell US about OUR CITY?

And thank you for bringing this back up again, the question still remains and Doc Goldstein refuses to answer the question: Would you rather live in Compton over anywhere in Oakland, Y/N?

Simple, yet very telling and refusing to answer pretty much says it all.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by sav858

This thread isn't about the NATION either yet here you are comparing it. I don't see why you have a problem with people using other cities to compare Oakland to when that is what you and everyone else does all the time. It's not like Oakland exists in a vacuum. You've said it numerous times before that Oakland isn't anything special when compared to places like SF. It's just bizarre that it's okay for YOU to constantly compare Oakland to other cities to prove your point but other's shouldn't.

Once again, please read the article. Montclair shouldn't have posted an article that focuses on the problems facing Oakland, if he/she doesn't want that being the topic of discussion. It's common sense .

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

I never said or implied that Oaklanders shouldn't go to new restaurants or bars. Once again, please read the article that YOU posted lol.

Im starting to think that you are hiding behind the article because you have no response.

How is enjoying the city's amenities a sign that Oaklanders are burying their heads in the sand with respect to crime?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

Once again, please read the article. Montclair shouldn't have posted an article that focuses on the problems facing Oakland, if you don't want that being the topic of discussion. It's common sense .

Oakland has always been the topic of discussion, so what are you talking about? No one has talked about these other cities w/o making a connection to Oakland.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Im starting to think that you are hiding behind the article because you have no response.

How is enjoying the city's amenities a sign that Oaklanders are burying their heads in the sand with respect to crime?

I'm not hiding behind the article, I told you that I never said or implied that Oaklanders can't enjoy going out to eat or drink. Going out to eat or drink has nothing to do with it. However, the article said... okay there is no point for me to keep quoting parts of the article, just read it haha.