Why is Silver Spring and Wheaton immune to gentrification? (North Beach: neighborhood, buy)

[bufflove]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

LOL @ $1,400/month-$1,800/month for a 1-BR apartment, which are the current market rates for Summit Hills, being "affordable".

Correct. As I stated in what you quoted, average 1-br in DTSS is in the $1700-2200 range.

[Chriz Brown]

Originally Posted by papichulo2

lol so do I fool matter of fact Im counting my rubber band stacks right now that can’t fit in a bank account. ok let me clear it up cause i don’t get you. ok so you still think you are entitled to everything right? Do you have any idea how stupid you sound?? i don’t believe people making less should live same place for less. lol who gives a flying… Why do you care??? all you sound like is some racist that hate people who make less money.(your not the first know it all fool around this area who is like this) get a life.. I don’t believe people who work more have to pay more taxes. It really bothers me. I work very hard and have to pay more taxes then i want to. Its not fair its really unfair. So I’m just gonna sit here and b*** all day cause I hate everybody and taxes.

I have a right to my opinion. If you don't agree you can explain why.. or you can leave the thread. Whining will not change my opinion and it just makes you sound immature.

And if you don't believe I am entitled to anything.. why do you believe burger flippers are entitled to live with people making three times more money?

You sound dumb.

[papichulo2]

Originally Posted by Chriz Brown

I have a right to my opinion. If you don't agree you can explain why.. or you can leave the thread. Whining will not change my opinion and it just makes you sound immature.

And if you don't believe I am entitled to anything.. why do you believe burger flippers are entitled to live with people making three times more money?

You sound dumb.

i don’t agree. Nobody on here does. I think you smart enough to know that. btw fast food workers don’t live that way since they make min wage and live with there folks so that sounds stupid rite there. i just hope u keep this opinion away from anybody face 2 face cuz u can get jumpd or even killed for some of the racist stuff u saying. it just takes one person and for real, I’m not playing. got learn when to keep it to yourself. u already offended a lot of folks on here. go back to ur NW dc forum

[Chriz Brown]

Originally Posted by papichulo2

i don’t agree. Nobody on here does. I think you smart enough to know that. btw fast food workers don’t live that way since they make min wage and live with there folks so that sounds stupid rite there. i just hope u keep this opinion away from anybody face 2 face cuz u can get jumpd or even killed for some of the racist stuff u saying. it just takes one person and for real, I’m not playing. got learn when to keep it to yourself. u already offended a lot of folks on here. go back to ur NW dc forum

I'm offended by your bad spelling and grammar. Your sentence structure is horrible.

How can I take someone seriously when they can't even string a sentence together?

[buckaroo17]

Originally Posted by Chriz Brown

... why do you believe burger flippers are entitled to live with people making three times more money?

Just so we're clear: someone who flips burgers (and probably has a second job in order to make ends meet in the insane CoL of this region) and possibly has a Section 8 voucher is BAD, but a drug dealer, or over-prescribing doctor, or Ponzi schemer who can pay in cash is OK to live in your 'hood? Just trying to gauge how you judge people.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by buckaroo17

Just so we're clear: someone who flips burgers (and probably has a second job in order to make ends meet in the insane CoL of this region) and possibly has a Section 8 voucher is BAD, but a drug dealer, or over-prescribing doctor, or Ponzi schemer who can pay in cash is OK to live in your 'hood? Just trying to gauge how you judge people.

That's not even the half of it. People like to assume that poor people are bad people. It's classicism. "Oh, that person is on section 8. Lazy crooks." Meanwhile some of the best contributors to society grew up poor or were poor at some point. And they benefited society way more than most upper-class individuals do who live off of their trust funds and go hiking in foreign countries every year.

[DistrictSonic]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

That's not even the half of it. People like to assume that poor people are bad people. It's classicism. "Oh, that person is on section 8. Lazy crooks." Meanwhile some of the best contributors to society grew up poor or were poor at some point. And they benefited society way more than most upper-class individuals do who live off of their trust funds and go hiking in foreign countries every year.

Keep telling yourself that, I can tell you right now it's not true. Most of the best contributors to society come from the upper-middle class, while most who come from the lower class contribute nothing. Regardless of race. Most of the Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, etc, the people that matter, the contributing members to society, come from the upper middle class. Their parents were upper-middle class, and so are they. The poor, they don't contribute, unless you talk about people who have kids they should not and contribute nothing, or violent criminals. But calling them the ones who are poor those who contribute the most...far from it. Statistically speaking it's not even close. It's the upper-middle class, and at the end of the day poor people don't matter. If anything they are a net negative on society. So calling the poor the biggest contributors is outright false.

So hold onto your fiction, but the fact is the upper middle class matters far more and contributes far more. You may buy into this mobility illusion. But it's just that, an illusion.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by DistrictSonic

Keep telling yourself that, I can tell you right now it's not true. Most of the best contributors to society come from the upper-middle class, while most who come from the lower class contribute nothing. Regardless of race. Most of the Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, etc, the people that matter, the contributing members to society, come from the upper middle class. Their parents were upper-middle class, and so are they. The poor, they don't contribute, unless you talk about people who have kids they should not and contribute nothing, or violent criminals. But calling them the ones who are poor those who contribute the most...far from it. Statistically speaking it's not even close. It's the upper-middle class, and at the end of the day poor people don't matter. If anything they are a net negative on society. So calling the poor the biggest contributors is outright false.

So hold onto your fiction, but the fact is the upper middle class matters far more and contributes far more. You may buy into this mobility illusion. But it's just that, an illusion.

I strongly disagree. Any reasonable individual can understand that poor people are not inherently evil. That's point number one. Point number two; poor people are capable of rising from their situation to make great contributions to society. Their transition to middle or upper-class status is a RESULT of their contribution whether through jobs, education, ministry, or civil service.

So while some people like to undervalue, underestimate and marginalize poor people who are on food stamps and section 8, which is the mindset my post responded to, some of the greatest contributors to society came from those circumstances, which is what my post tried to convey.

Even doctors and lawyers live in what most people would consider ghetto or low-income neighborhoods. All of them just don't leave to live on the other side of the tracks. They stay and contribute a great deal to their community. Hence, the benefit of the MIXED-INCOME community.

The overall retort to the discussion is poor people have just as much potential as a wealthy person does and the only difference is opportunity. Obviously wealthy people have more opportunity. Therefore, I see no reason why a mixed-income neighborhood is a bad thing. Those neighborhoods create the best opportunities for all its residents and not only the privileged few.

I can almost guarantee you won't find the trust fund baby giving back to a poor community that they never stepped foot in. More often, you will find those who came from the poor neighborhoods giving back to those same neighborhoods in various ways. That's the social benefit; the social contribution. It's not just about money or profession, but what shapes you as an individual. And I will always believe that growing up without means builds a lot more character than having it all. Is this true for everyone on both sides? No. That is my belief whether you feel it is fiction or not.

We'll just agree to disagree on this.

[Chriz Brown]

Originally Posted by buckaroo17

Just so we're clear: someone who flips burgers (and probably has a second job in order to make ends meet in the insane CoL of this region) and possibly has a Section 8 voucher is BAD, but a drug dealer, or over-prescribing doctor, or Ponzi schemer who can pay in cash is OK to live in your 'hood? Just trying to gauge how you judge people.

Only people who can afford to live in my area should be able too. No one should get any kind of price discount.

This isn't really complicated so I don't know why you can't grasp it.

[Chriz Brown]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

I strongly disagree. Any reasonable individual can understand that poor people are not inherently evil. That's point number one. Point number two; poor people are capable of rising from their situation to make great contributions to society. Their transition to middle or upper-class status is a RESULT of their contribution whether through jobs, education, ministry, or civil service.

So while some people like to undervalue, underestimate and marginalize poor people who are on food stamps and section 8, which is the mindset my post responded to, some of the greatest contributors to society came from those circumstances, which is what my post tried to convey.

Even doctors and lawyers live in what most people would consider ghetto or low-income neighborhoods. All of them just don't leave to live on the other side of the tracks. They stay and contribute a great deal to their community. Hence, the benefit of the MIXED-INCOME community.

The overall retort to the discussion is poor people have just as much potential as a wealthy person does and the only difference is opportunity. Obviously wealthy people have more opportunity. Therefore, I see no reason why a mixed-income neighborhood is a bad thing. Those neighborhoods create the best opportunities for all its residents and not only the privileged few.

I can almost guarantee you won't find the trust fund baby giving back to a poor community that they never stepped foot in. More often, you will find those who came from the poor neighborhoods giving back to those same neighborhoods in various ways. That's the social benefit; the social contribution. It's not just about money or profession, but what shapes you as an individual. And I will always believe that growing up without means builds a lot more character than having it all. Is this true for everyone on both sides? No. That is my belief whether you feel it is fiction or not.

We'll just agree to disagree on this.

Mixed income neighborhoods are ok with me. But mixed income housing is ridiculous. If I have to pay $2,000 a mouth to live there, then so does the burger flipper. No one is special.

I understand the complexity of the social issues and the difference in opportunity some people get over others 100%. But giving people free crap doesn't solve that problem. Which is why I hate panhandlers.

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime.

Its about common sense. Like I said earlier. Which is not very common because people are too emotional and ignorant to understand how the world really works.