Where do you see DC in 20 years? (violent crime, credit)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This area must be ignorant as all getup then. because you dont run into that many people who work for those firms you mention. But ill tell you what i do run into alot of. Fed agency workers. lobbyists. hill interns. govt contractors. WMATA operators, bus drivers and other miscellaneous workers. WASA employees. Teachers. IT specialists for govt contractors and agencies. Most scientists i meet who move here either work at NASA out in greenbelt or their policy hacks.
Those firms u mention i dont doubt their existence. But the federal and district govt agencies grossly overshadow if not completely dwarf out their presence. So I dont speak of ignorance, I just speak from common knowledge and good ol fashioned common sense. BC most engineering professionals and a large bulk of scientists do not move here to actually practice their craft. Finance and insurance is largely for federal and govt purposes. and World Bank and IMF really? You know they dont operate on the same wavelength as someone like bank of america or wells fargo.
U goto Charlotte its a banking town. Goto Pittsburgh its a steel town converting to biotech, robotics and lightweight finance and insurance. Detroit was autoplant land for years and now theyre slowly converting to other industries. The bay area is famously known for computers and electronics technology. Boston is finance, educational industries and engineering. Baltimore was a heavy industry and seaport city. Hunstville, AL (albeit a unkown small city outside of the south) is a engineering and science town due to NASA and other aerospace industries and entities in that area. Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, toronto, and other mega cities rose to fame on the back of multiple lucrative industries. You goto these cities those industries have a dominant obvious presence that cant be ignored; thats why those cities reputations are associated with them. Alot of the local sports arenas and other public facilities in those cities are sponsored and many times bankrolled by the industrial titans from those local industries. DC's industry is government plain and simple. Even some of the local sports teams allude to its federal heritage (ie the capitals the nationals).
and people act like govt in DC is a small mediocre thing. This is the capital of a large and one of hte wealthiest nations on the planet. So unsurprisingly theres a shotton of federal and national monuments, agencies and other buildings associated with the federal govt. Heck to pay homage to the nation many of the citys major strips are named after US states.
You will NEVER know as much her. Im glad she recognizes Arlington businesses like Rosetta Stone though.
You will NEVER know as much her. Im glad she recognizes Arlington businesses like Rosetta Stone though.
At least you learned this.
On the other matter. Again inaccurate. Most scientists who work for the government actually do science. The National Institute for Health for example actually does medical research, as does the national science foundation. There is quite a bit of engineering and science at the department of energy as well. A large bulk of the science and engineering professionals actually do practice their craft in the area. While some are in policy positions, they are actually a minority. Yes the federal government is here, and a large part of DC's economy, but there is a failure to recognize, the regions economy is much more diverse as well. There is also a failure to recognize by some of you what exactly the government does in the area. Which is quite a bit of scientific research and engineering on it's own. Again, there is a general ignorance abound here. The problem is overgeneralizing the regions economy, while also demonstrating complete ignorance about it. I am not exactly shocked on this matter though. Most people in the US have a very weak understanding of economics.
Da,m, I was right with you up til the second sentence of that last paragraph.
See, this is where I confuse everyone. Everyone thinks that I am here to undermine and tear down cities. In fact, what I do is I step back, assess, and revisit my observations. Now, with these obersvations come clear truths that are backed up by many others. So in essence, I stick to the point that DC should be its own culture and be one with it. This way, people will be less confused about what to expect when they get here. Sure, you will still get the silly dopes that get rid of their cars to live in a group home with a bunch of hippies... Come to find out they are single for the next 10 years with no means to extend their genes.
For the past couple years since I finally came to about DC, I have been constantly saying that DC is a unique city BUT, it has been going through major Identity changes. Once these changes finally materialize, at least to a point that outsiders really understand the "secrets of the city", there will be less people complaining. By then, the secret will be out and people will be able to make better informed decisions on whether or not they really want to come to DC.
DC has a real sticking point. It seems to not want to accept its uniqueness because it is constantly battling others putting it down. But yet, holds on to this little secret. It's like the little boy or girl in class that is always getting picked on but no matter what is presented, they will argue simply to seem relevant- even if the argument is in their favor. It's a terrible inferiority complex. So when I say DC is unique, people will shut me down by saying DC is like every other city. But the same people will turn around and call out others for not making enough money to live in DC.
Another example is when you talk about DC style. DC boosters will tell you that they are here for work and could care less about style. But unaware that fashion is a unique way to express one’s self and is increasingly becoming an important component of culture- no matter where you are. But let you even utter anything about DC having no style and oh, boy, you will get it. But why? Why is one even so defensive about something that one could care less about? Answer is simple- it’s an inferiority complex in wanting to be all or none. Furthermore, they don’t like to be figured out. They would rather the secret stay within their own little circles. It's a really strange phenomenon.
So I leave you with article below written by a DC booster. Again, I sense, observe, and then come to terms with the realities of my suspicions...
For how long has D.C.’s New York inferiority complex existed? What role have certain patronizing New York publications played in this process?If you’ve been here a few years and don’t realize what the District has going for it, and you’re still smarting over how not-powerful the very best parts of the city are, you don’t understand the city. You probably never will. Go home. You don’t intend to stay, and we probably don’t want you to stick around, anyway. If you discovered that D.C. was a city you weren’t at all expecting, it’s perhaps because the District’s charms are still well-kept secrets to those who don’t really care to live here. Maybe we like it that way.
Again, what secret? Who are you fooling? Just let the friggin secret out so people know not to come and you won't have to write articles about your inferiority complex with new york.
Da,m, I was right with you up til the second sentence of that last paragraph.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sketter
I was also with you until you stated that "But personally, I think it's a good thing. I am all about setting rules, boundaries, and defined parameters- unlike how America is going with all this multiculturalism and integration that is killing its culture."
Last time society did that was during white flight when minorities, more specifically blacks, couldn't get housing in the suburbs do to racially restrictive covenants , redlining and mortgage discrimination. Knowing how devastating that was to the black community I don't know of anyone who would be in favor of that type of policy today besides racists.
Ask around here about American culture and they will feed you all types of "America was built by immigrants".. Nobody cares about American culture or even DC culture- look what has happened to chocolate city. It was a chocolate city and I was fine with it being all chocolate. Now, the "trashy element", as the classists on here call it, is being rid of. But that is america for you...
I am not turning this thread into a political one. But if you are going to talk about a city's future, you have to talk about the WORKING CLASS culture- and often politics may seep in. If only the educated and affluent will reside in the DC area, then let it be because it will greatly benefit the area as a whole. It will also alleviate false moves and hopes by those that don't have adequate skills.
IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH COLOR. People of all cultures and ethnicities can be affluent and educated. They just deserve to live together.
But here is the crazy part: the same ones that will tell you that you need an education and masters to live in DC get crazy by me saying what I said above. They believe I am being bias towards others. It's loony tunes ville.
BUT HERE IS THE CATCH. I promote monoculturalism ONLY in DC. Not for every city because DC is so centralized that there is no outlet. That is the difference! You can have it in Brooklyn but one borough away, you are in a different zone that makes up for it. DC immediate area doesn't have plentiful vibrant metro areas on the scale of other cities.
Last edited by halfamazing; 04-19-2016 at 03:54 PM..
I am not turning this thread into a political one. But if you are going to talk about a city's future, you have to talk about the WORKING CLASS culture- and often politics may seep in. If only the educated and affluent will reside in the DC area, then let it be because it will greatly benefit the area as a whole. It will also alleviate false moves and hopes by those that don't have adequate skills.
IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH COLOR. People of all cultures and ethnicities can be affluent and educated. They just deserve to live together.
But here is the crazy part: the same ones that will tell you that you need an education and masters to live in DC get crazy by me saying what I said above. They believe I am being bias towards others. It's loony tunes ville.
BUT HERE IS THE CATCH. I promote monoculturalism ONLY in DC. Not for every city because DC is so centralized that there is no outlet. That is the difference! You can have it in Brooklyn but one borough away, you are in a different zone that makes up for it. DC immediate area doesn't have plentiful vibrant metro areas on the scale of other cities.
You don't necessarily NEED monoculturalism. You just need the absence of low culture.
Based on where DC is at the moment and where it seems to be going.. its safe to say those who engage in low culture and trashy behavior will have few (no) opportunities to advance here.
I am not turning this thread into a political one. But if you are going to talk about a city's future, you have to talk about the WORKING CLASS culture- and often politics may seep in. If only the educated and affluent will reside in the DC area, then let it be because it will greatly benefit the area as a whole. It will also alleviate false moves and hopes by those that don't have adequate skills.
IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH COLOR. People of all cultures and ethnicities can be affluent and educated. They just deserve to live together.
But here is the crazy part: the same ones that will tell you that you need an education and masters to live in DC get crazy by me saying what I said above. They believe I am being bias towards others. It's loony tunes ville.
BUT HERE IS THE CATCH. I promote monoculturalism ONLY in DC. Not for every city because DC is so centralized that there is no outlet. That is the difference! You can have it in Brooklyn but one borough away, you are in a different zone that makes up for it. DC immediate area doesn't have plentiful vibrant metro areas on the scale of other cities.
Please point to me where i said anything about color. This is the message I left on all deleted posts here, as they belonged to 2 members:
"get a room you two, stop fighting in public. do it again and both of you will enjoy a week long timeout,regardless who started"
If you want to discuss anything regarding moderation, you know where to find me and I am open. But please note that doing that in public is not only a direct violation of the tos, it's also off topic and can hijack the thread.
Now please, back on topic.
Yac.
Well back to the posters original question I see D.C. in 20 years having more educated citizens but also having a less vibrant, less distinguishable culture and the city feeling more sterile/bland and resembling the suburbs more outside of the gay culture and certain parts of the African American Culture.
Unlike a lot of people who have previously posted on hear I don’t equate having culture with people’s resumes, yes in 20 years D.C. people in the city on a per capita basis will probably have more polished resumes than any other city in the country but I don’t see how that equates to it having more or a better culture. Just for example Arlington has a higher household median income and its population is more educated than D.C. but I have never heard anyone say that Arlington has more or better culture than D.C. There are numerous cities in the country who residents aren’t known for being the most educated on a per capita basis but still have a vibrant and rich cultures ex. New Orleans, Philly, Chicago, Miami, and ATL to name a few.
I know cities do change and evolve as do cultures but with this new movement of people moving back into the city, not saying it won’t happen, but I have yet to see any resemblance of some new culture, vibrancy or energy from these people that would distinguish D.C. in the future from Arlington or any other suburb for that matter besides the city being more walkable, having good transit and having more expensive and highbrow restaurants and events (which a lot of people on this blog seem to be obsessed with). I would say that a lot of people seem to be making vague descriptions of low brow culture and how the city needs to get rid of that but I will say that a lot of events and activities that people enjoy in the city originated from that low brow culture, that is constantly being criticized, such as the Funk Parade, Porch Concerts, hole in the wall mom and pop restaurants, Jazz venues, mumbo sauce, Patty Boom Boom (a reggae dance hall that closed), Unions Arts DC (which is closing soon), go-go shows, comedy shows, certain art shows, punk rock shows, and other musical acts and all these things distinguish D.C. from other cities and suburbs that don’t have these homegrown events or activities.
Well back to the posters original question I see D.C. in 20 years having more educated citizens but also having a less vibrant, less distinguishable culture and the city feeling more sterile/bland and resembling the suburbs more outside of the gay culture and certain parts of the African American Culture.
Unlike a lot of people who have previously posted on hear I don’t equate having culture with people’s resumes, yes in 20 years D.C. people in the city on a per capita basis will probably have more polished resumes than any other city in the country but I don’t see how that equates to it having more or a better culture. Just for example Arlington has a higher household median income and its population is more educated than D.C. but I have never heard anyone say that Arlington has more or better culture than D.C. There are numerous cities in the country who residents aren’t known for being the most educated on a per capita basis but still have a vibrant and rich cultures ex. New Orleans, Philly, Chicago, Miami, and ATL to name a few.
I know cities do change and evolve as do cultures but with this new movement of people moving back into the city, not saying it won’t happen, but I have yet to see any resemblance of some new culture, vibrancy or energy from these people that would distinguish D.C. in the future from Arlington or any other suburb for that matter besides the city being more walkable, having good transit and having more expensive and highbrow restaurants and events (which a lot of people on this blog seem to be obsessed with). I would say that a lot of people seem to be making vague descriptions of low brow culture and how the city needs to get rid of that but I will say that a lot of events and activities that people enjoy in the city originated from that low brow culture, that is constantly being criticized, such as the Funk Parade, Porch Concerts, hole in the wall mom and pop restaurants, Jazz venues, mumbo sauce, Patty Boom Boom (a reggae dance hall that closed), Unions Arts DC (which is closing soon), go-go shows, comedy shows, certain art shows, punk rock shows, and other musical acts and all these things distinguish D.C. from other cities and suburbs that don’t have these homegrown events or activities.
these people dont care about culture or the other things that make a city fun and interesting....all they care about is transit and how fast they can get rid of all the poor people in the city.....bc poor people "ruined" the great city that the rich people VOLUNTARILY ABANDONED.......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
