Funny story : DC has new problem , too much money (house, safety)
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.
O well. None of it is trickling down, so what difference does it make?
As part of the surpluses the last 3 years, DC has done the following for businesses and residents:
- Reduced the corporate tax rate for businesses from 9.975% to 8.25%
- More than doubling the individual tax exemption from $1,775 to $4,000
- Raised the standard tax deduction to $6,100 for individuals, $8,950 for heads of households, and $12,200 for married couples
- Increased the estate tax threshold from $2 million to $5.49 million
^ Hmmm so you got all or some of that back from the district on your tax return? If so, you must be pretty smart to know how to beat the system at its own game like that.
^ Hmmm so you got all or some of that back from the district on your tax return? If so, you must be pretty smart to know how to beat the system at its own game like that.
The tax reductions over the last 3 years and the one to begin on January 2018 are tied to budget surpluses, i.e. trickling down to DC businesses and residents. DC residents and businesses are the recipients of those reductions. Truth be told, though, is that I really don't understand your comment.
O well. None of it is trickling down, so what difference does it make?
Its not trickling down because those people don't have the skills or education to attain the types of jobs DC is currently creating. This is why blue collar workers all over the country are struggling and thought Trump would save them.
Poor people are poor because they lack the skills, abilities, fitness or education the current economy demands. Its really that simple. Past racism, sexism and other "isms" are definitely a factor, but not the only factor like some people try to make it seem.
Some of these posters don't understand the difference between education and skill, a Master's Degree in Liberal Arts is educated but not skilled.
Skilled labor is more technical and requires an aptitude in engineering, mechanics, technology, skilled trades such as HVAC, welder, plumber, electrician, architect, executive chef, doctor, nurse, etc.
Skilled jobs are more hands on and usually take years to master.
Some posters also keep referencing college which is good but at 25,000 a year or more multiplied by 4 years or longer for graduate school you're forgetting to mention the debt bubble these student loans are creating and debt will kill prosperity rather quickly.
Skilled jobs are more hands on and usually take years to master.
Some posters also keep referencing college which is good but at 25,000 a year or more multiplied by 4 years or longer for graduate school you're forgetting to mention the debt bubble these student loans are creating and debt will kill prosperity rather quickly.
The college debt situation is very interesting. I've been wondering how that will play out in the coming years. You cannot build wealth if you are drowning in debt.
I know some who made extreme sacrifices and paid off their college loan debt fast, but they were able to secure high paying jobs. College educated people with $25,000 - $50,000 in load debt or higher who don't secure a high paying job might find themselves in a depressing hamster wheel.
There are definitely a lot of built-in road blocks in our system. If you avoid college, its harder to get a high paying job. Yet, if you cannot afford college (as most can't) you go into massive debt to get a degree. Once you have a degree you may or may not get a high paying job that allows you to manage or eliminate your debt to build wealth. On top of that, financial planning and investing is not really taught in public schools.
Of course it should be no surprise that those at the top want to stay there. Designing the system in a way that makes wealth building close to impossible for most of the population helps them secure their spot at the top of the food chain.
What people today need to understand is that if you don't make success your #1 priority here in the U.S. then its very unlikely you will find much success. Another thing people need to understand is that those at the top DO NOT CARE about you. They never have and they never will. So stop waiting for them to care.
My wife got her degree with scholarships and such, academically she's very intelligent but sometimes I wonder about her common sense, which can't be taught, but this June we've been together 24 years.
I went to school and got a degree in refrigeration and HVAC systems but also studied a few English classes, I love to write and I'm also prior service Army so I had the GI Bill, my training and education didn't cost me anything either but I did miss the birth of my child and baby's first Christmas when I deployed for Bosnia.
Gentrification I still think is dangerous and yeah I get that nobody wants to live in another Chicago or Detroit or how DC used to be but like what's happened in San Francisco they raised the cost of living so high that even degree holding residents who do not work in the tech field can no longer afford it either and these are educated like minded people.
Gentrification I still think is dangerous and yeah I get that nobody wants to live in another Chicago or Detroit or how DC used to be but like what's happened in San Francisco they raised the cost of living so high that even degree holding residents who do not work in the tech field can no longer afford it either and these are educated like minded people.
I don't think is really all that dangerous looking at the big picture. Gentrification is actually just a return to how cities were originally designed to function. Gentrification in DC and other cities is removing low income people who don't add much $$ to the economy and replacing them with high income people who boost the local economy. This gives the city more tax dollars.
Its about efficiency and sustainability too. Its very wasteful to have a system where the highest earners live miles and miles away from their jobs. This was the dynamic set up with suburban sprawl in the 1950's that lead to the decay and erosion of most inner cities.
When the high earners live AND work in close proximity, they make the local economy much stronger and more efficient. Money/time/energy is saved by eliminating long and wasteful commuting. People become more accessible for networking. It boosts local businesses because the high earners have $$$ to spend and they don't leave the city at 5pm.
I think most people will be ok. They might never be able to own a home, but they will be ok. There are only so many rich people who want to live in urban cores.
It is hard to know what gentrification will mean for the very poor though. I suspect one of two possibilities or a mix:
Scenario #1: Integration
This would be the end of poor neighborhoods. With mixed use development, poor people would be peppered in with the general population and would live in random places all around the metro area. This would create a situation where they cannot have any kind of community where crime, violence and low culture can thrive.
Scenario #2: Restriction
This would be a location change of poor neighborhoods from inner cities to suburban or rural areas. This would force the poor to travel very far and often for work.. taking away the time/energy they would have to commit crimes in developed areas. And those who commit crimes within the city would have no easy escape because home is 20 miles away. You'll notice areas near Metro stops and other transportation is becoming increasingly expensive. Limiting the mobility and proximity of the poor also makes it harder for them to have a community where crime and violence can thrive. This is why poor rural areas don't have the crime issues urban areas have. Mobility and proximity. People and resources are too spread out for crime to be a convenient solution.
I think the main goals of gentrification are to improve sustainability, boost the economy and curb crime. All of that seems to be taking place already.
I know about rural areas, I have a 4 bedroom 2 bath home on farm land and here in the Virginia sticks we will shoot you if you were to try and enter our home with the intent to harm or kill, our town and County curbs growth because we know what it attracts, trouble, and we don't want it here either.
I grew up in a small New York town an hour north of New York City and all the hipsters and such that live in the city now would be scared to death to live there 20-30years ago and the same can be said for the murder capital, Washington DC.
My biggest turn off to gentrification is what it does to people who spent their whole lives being a part of a community and the neighborhood restaurants and shops that you would only find by going there.
For example if I come to DC I want to try Ben's Chili Bowl because it's unique to that region, I can go to the Olive Garden anywhere, I want to dine and experience DC.
My biggest turn off to gentrification is what it does to people who spent their whole lives being a part of a community and the neighborhood restaurants and shops that you would only find by going there.
For example if I come to DC I want to try Ben's Chili Bowl because it's unique to that region, I can go to the Olive Garden anywhere, I want to dine and experience DC.
I would agree. Losing those unique small businesses that make a city authentic is one major downside of gentrification that I don't like. The truth is.. when you drive out the bad element poor residents, you end up pushing out many of the good ones too.
It would be nice if developers allowed existing businesses a safety net. For instance.. lets say they want to bulldoze the block where Ben's Chili Bowl is. They should pay the owners what is equal to daily profit for the time that area is being re-developed. Once the new development is built, they should allow a space for Bens Chili Bowl to return in the new building. Much better than just letting Chipotle and Panera move in.
A lot of small businesses have been destroyed by development in close proximity to them. Even when they are not actually in the space that is being developed.. the loss of foot traffic due to closed roads and sidewalks kills their business. That's not right or fair.
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.
