U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > District of Columbia > Washington, DC
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-01-2009, 10:50 AM
 
9,985 posts, read 15,654,823 times
Reputation: 4604

Advertisements

Quote:
I'm not espousing conservative thought. Conservatives think you should let the poor rot. I just point out that a mixed economic community brought on by gentrification helps the schools.
No, conservatives think the poor should use education to better themselves.

You think they should be bulldozed into another jurisdiction via gentrification so that they are no longer your problem and you can replace them with other people and declare victory for the schools whilst singing faux platitudes.

So you are actually correct when you say you are not espousing conservative thought and I will retract that. In reality you are advocating a variation of ethnic (or perhaps economic) cleansing.

Not that it would not work- it will. You will save the schools by stockpiling them with people like you. People who want to be educated. But you will also throw the poor to another jurisdiction which will do nothing to solve their problems or encourage them to better themselves.

So it seems you are the one who wants to let the poor rot. Or just go away.

 
Old 10-01-2009, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,913 posts, read 6,743,706 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
No, conservatives think the poor should use education to better themselves.

You think they should be bulldozed into another jurisdiction via gentrification so that they are no longer your problem and you can replace them with other people and declare victory for the schools whilst singing faux platitudes.

So you are actually correct when you say you are not espousing conservative thought and I will retract that. In reality you are advocating a variation of ethnic (or perhaps economic) cleansing.
Kind of a laughable accusation given that I've lived east of Rock Creek Park for the last 20 years. My point is that poverty should be spread throughout the community not concentrated in ghettos. Gentrification isn't going to turn Washington DC into some lily white enclave like parts of Virginia. Probably 1/3 of the new upper income families in our neighborhood are non-white.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 02:12 PM
 
9,985 posts, read 15,654,823 times
Reputation: 4604
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Kind of a laughable accusation given that I've lived east of Rock Creek Park for the last 20 years. My point is that poverty should be spread throughout the community not concentrated in ghettos. Gentrification isn't going to turn Washington DC into some lily white enclave like parts of Virginia. Probably 1/3 of the new upper income families in our neighborhood are non-white.
I know where you live. That area has been just fine for longer than you have been there. Of course, despite your noble gesture of gracing that neighborhood with your presence, you did so after you had utilized Maryland schools and had no need to think about DC schools except as a pundit. Quite convenient to say the least.

I am not accusing you of anything, although I will plead guilty to a veiled implication of hypocrisy. Gentrification is not going to result in some kind of perfect demographic distribution of poor people (one here, three there?). It pushes people out and eliminates the need to place them in any social calculus.

I suspect you are backtracking yet again. Why not simply be honest? You don't want poor people and their pathologies around you, but to admit to that would be to question the very foundation of your personal philosophies, such as they are.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,913 posts, read 6,743,706 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
I know where you live. That area has been just fine for longer than you have been there. Of course, despite your noble gesture of gracing that neighborhood with your presence, you did so after you had utilized Maryland schools and had no need to think about DC schools except as a pundit. Quite convenient to say the least.
Actually my ex-wife, who lives in Maryland, had custody of my son.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
I am not accusing you of anything, although I will plead guilty to a veiled implication of hypocrisy. Gentrification is not going to result in some kind of perfect demographic distribution of poor people (one here, three there?). It pushes people out and eliminates the need to place them in any social calculus.

I suspect you are backtracking yet again. Why not simply be honest? You don't want poor people and their pathologies around you, but to admit to that would be to question the very foundation of your personal philosophies, such as they are.
LOL Oh yeah 20 years ago I moved east of the Park to root out the poor, the minorities, the disadvantaged and force them into ghettos out in Potomac. LOL You're a trip Moth
 
Old 10-01-2009, 04:14 PM
 
19 posts, read 107,575 times
Reputation: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Poverty in and of itself is a major challenge.
I believe you have the cause and effect mixed up. Compare MoCo students with DC students. Just 10 miles separate Churchill and Wooten from Roosevelt and Coolidge but the differences in achievement are vast. It's not money - DC school system spends more per pupil than MoCo does.

The fact is, no amount of money can force a child to learn that has no ambition to learn. Conversely, if a student really wants to learn something, then it costs next to nothing to read a book or surf the 'net on the subject.

I posit that the reason MoCo students achieve more than their DC counterparts is that their parents enforce discipline and provide motivation for their kids to learn which are the same conditions that make them 'successful' in life.

That's why I LOL at DC every few years when they get a new superintendent that is 'going to turn the system around blah blah blah'. They need to replace the parents, not the superintendent.
 
Old 10-01-2009, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,913 posts, read 6,743,706 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotMeAgain View Post
I believe you have the cause and effect mixed up. Compare MoCo students with DC students. Just 10 miles separate Churchill and Wooten from Roosevelt and Coolidge but the differences in achievement are vast. It's not money - DC school system spends more per pupil than MoCo does.

The fact is, no amount of money can force a child to learn that has no ambition to learn. Conversely, if a student really wants to learn something, then it costs next to nothing to read a book or surf the 'net on the subject.
It's not the money you spend in school, it's the affluence of the community.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NotMeAgain View Post
I posit that the reason MoCo students achieve more than their DC counterparts is that their parents enforce discipline and provide motivation for their kids to learn which are the same conditions that make them 'successful' in life.

That's why I LOL at DC every few years when they get a new superintendent that is 'going to turn the system around blah blah blah'. They need to replace the parents, not the superintendent.
Most of the parents of MoCo kids are amazingly bad parents who set an extremely poor example for their children. But at the end of the day, the stability of economic affluence overcome crappy parenting.
 
Old 10-02-2009, 06:39 AM
 
19 posts, read 107,575 times
Reputation: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Most of the parents of MoCo kids are amazingly bad parents who set an extremely poor example for their children. .
LOL - that's a pretty broad brush.... bad parents compared to whom???
 
Old 10-03-2009, 10:37 PM
 
656 posts, read 1,196,338 times
Reputation: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
I used to think gentrification was bad, but I'm pretty sure it will continue so long as values keep shifting away from suburban living to urban living just like urban blight emerged when people took to the automobile.

You'd be hard-pressed to convince me that U Street or Dupont, for example, are worse places today than they were in the 70s, 80s, and even 90s.
The term gentrification is usually used in context of when formerly undesirable neighborhoods where the mostly poor live become wealthy, however that is not always the scenario that is played out in cities.

Sometimes, middle income areas may suddenly become very expensive, sometimes the poor in certain areas
of housing projects, rent regulated apartments (none in D.C. although some MD suburbs have explored the concept),

Gentrification does make a neighboorhood "better", it increases the property values, and in the case of housing bubbles it can be a misleading indicator,

Gentrification can bring in more money, clean streets, and renewed investments, but sometimes that can be temporary.

What makes a neighboorhood have much less crime is effective policing, true later on property values can increase due to that, but gentrification being good in that it increases the neighboorhood is not necessarily accurate.

In cities such as new york , gentrification did not in itself lead to lower crimes or cleaner streets, it was effective government.

The effective government may have precluded gentrification itself, this making the issue of gentrification irrelevant to the neighborhood.

The concept of people shifting from suburbs to urban ones is a very interesting one, but many researches indicate that it is too early to make a judgment call, it depends on the city, politics, as well as transit systems, downtowns, etc.

I will explain more on that later.
 
Old 10-03-2009, 10:45 PM
 
656 posts, read 1,196,338 times
Reputation: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
It's not the money you spend in school, it's the affluence of the community.

Very interesting point, every child is different when it comes to education, I am not the type to argue for low education spending,I agree more money can produce more results when effective applied, but sometimes education depends on the child's motivation, the parents, and the teacher itself talking and training to the student and the child listening.

In affluent areas you tend to have much less social problems, although they still occur and exists, and pockets of MoCo are not exempt.

This may lead to schools becoming more safer and less rowdiness or overcrowding.

Still, the concept of education is a broad one, some children don't do well in public schools, but may have home instructors, or do a bit better in private school but not necessarily so.

Some educational classes might be more difficult to muster, but if a teacher teaches the necessarily skills and the child knows how to think critically and analyze things, as well as learning about subjects which teachers may not talk about, ie heating and cooling homes, cars, painting walls, a curious child may ask about those things to a tacher, than its hard to gauge.


Most of the parents of MoCo kids are amazingly bad parents who set an extremely poor example for their children. But at the end of the day, the stability of economic affluence overcome crappy parenting.
It can also overcome second rate education, more affluent parents may have more money and resources to spend on their children, some can even spend hundreds of dollars on tutors and reward their students,the stability of the household which comes with affluence, and the educational attainment does help.

Interesting, please not the not everybody in MoCo is affluent, the homes are very expensive which can eat up income, also there are many asian americans in some of those areas, some of whom may have had technical skills or higher motivation, although not all asian americans perform well such as the case in poorer inner cities in california which prostitution, gangs and smuggling occur and is harder to document.
 
Old 10-03-2009, 10:49 PM
 
656 posts, read 1,196,338 times
Reputation: 84
I also forget something, sometimes its not just what you know but who you know, and being affluent does help, say your skilled and can do work but need that position or job.
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.


Closed Thread



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > District of Columbia > Washington, DC
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top