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.
So are you for no affordable housing at all? Do you not care that it might create "division and bitterness" in the city neighborhoods that have to have it by mandate? What specifically about these individuals would cause division and bitterness in a rich neighborhood but not in a less affluent one? I pointed out earlier that any new developments in Pilsen and Little Village must have 30% of the units set aside as affordable. In the rest of the city it is 20%, though that can be diverted. So why limit this just to certain parts of the city?
I'm not against affordable housing, but what I'm saying is you should live in an area that meets your budget, I don't like the idea of having a million dollar home next to a $150k small house.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRU67
And how do you propose to make those areas where they live safe? Despite millions upon millions of dollars spent on social programs, these neighborhoods have not gotten any safer. The solution for some on the left - of which the North Shore is home to many - is to take some or all of the police budget and spend even more on these programs, which I virtually guarantee won't work. And signs of gentrification in depopulating East Garfield Park are already being met with protest. So what would you do to fix it?
Those programs won't mean anything if there's no proper protection, limiting crime, and businesses around. Your number one problem around these areas is gang violence, none of the other stuff is gonna work unless you eliminate that first. How do you do that? For starters you need more police around those parts and you need a politician with some guts to actually go after all those gangs and drugs. Once most of the bad stuff is out of the picture, you can work with the families that live there by giving them these programs and most importantly, jobs to help them get on their feet and not breed the next generation of gangsters. For the time being, safety is the number one concern, no parent should have to worry daily about their kid getting shot just because they're going to school, that's not a life to live and an immediate problem that should be solved imo.
Gangs come from the lack of a family structure, or even the families themselves. Gangs can be a family affair, or an inevitability in these environments. So what are you going to address first, the chicken, or the egg? Progressives seem to think that keeping poor people in "their area" is the humane thing to do. But all that often serves to do is perpetuate the negative social networks which are causing the cycles of poverty and violence that the poorest neighborhoods have been stuck in for over a half century.
As to budget, much affordable housing goes to people who make 0-30% of the area median income. Policy has been to bring housing to within their budget by giving them housing vouchers or through affordable housing mandates, mostly in Chicago, which are getting more onerous in gentrifying neighborhoods. There's also a bill in the Illinois House to allow for rent control. Agree or not, that's how it's being done. So with all this being policy, I have a hard time feeling sympathy for somebody who feels like their million dollar suburban home is going to be sullied by a ghastly affordable home next door.
We both agree that more active policing would help. But that is not going to be easy in this current climate. Police are on their heels, Handcuffed, pun intended, by a state's attorney who doesn't prosecute cases, an ACLU consent decree which complicates and discourages street stops, and a general lack of support among political leadership. We would need to reverse course in order to get back to proactive policing. I wonder if our area has the stomach for that.
Good paying blue collar jobs would help. That would give kids not bound for college some other option beyond the allure and easy cash of gangs. Unfortunately though, our city and state's focus on that has not really been there. Chicago has done a great job attracting professional jobs over the past few decades, but blue collar jobs less so.
The patterns I site above are going to be hard to shake. That is particularly true when people can isolate themselves from them if they have enough money. So maybe we break that up a little bit, so we get a better collective understanding of what's really going on in these high crime areas. We're too segregated right now.
Gangs come from the lack of a family structure, or even the families themselves. Gangs can be a family affair, or an inevitability in these environments. So what are you going to address first, the chicken, or the egg? Progressives seem to think that keeping poor people in "their area" is the humane thing to do. But all that often serves to do is perpetuate the negative social networks which are causing the cycles of poverty and violence that the poorest neighborhoods have been stuck in for over a half century.
As to budget, much affordable housing goes to people who make 0-30% of the area median income. Policy has been to bring housing to within their budget by giving them housing vouchers or through affordable housing mandates, mostly in Chicago, which are getting more onerous in gentrifying neighborhoods. There's also a bill in the Illinois House to allow for rent control. Agree or not, that's how it's being done. So with all this being policy, I have a hard time feeling sympathy for somebody who feels like their million dollar suburban home is going to be sullied by a ghastly affordable home next door.
We both agree that more active policing would help. But that is not going to be easy in this current climate. Police are on their heels, Handcuffed, pun intended, by a state's attorney who doesn't prosecute cases, an ACLU consent decree which complicates and discourages street stops, and a general lack of support among political leadership. We would need to reverse course in order to get back to proactive policing. I wonder if our area has the stomach for that.
Good paying blue collar jobs would help. That would give kids not bound for college some other option beyond the allure and easy cash of gangs. Unfortunately though, our city and state's focus on that has not really been there. Chicago has done a great job attracting professional jobs over the past few decades, but blue collar jobs less so.
The patterns I site above are going to be hard to shake. That is particularly true when people can isolate themselves from them if they have enough money. So maybe we break that up a little bit, so we get a better collective understanding of what's really going on in these high crime areas. We're too segregated right now.
Like I said, highest priority should be making those areas safe so the people living there can have a chance. The lack of family structure is something that the community needs to fix for itself if they want a brighter future. Sadly part of the problem is cultural too, a good example of that is hip hop music glorifying this lifestyle. To someone on the outside hip hop music is not really part of their life, it's just entertainment. But to a kid growing up in that environment I would imagine it plays a bigger role, especially to youth who grow up with no fathers or to drug addict parents.
If these communities continue waiting for outside help then good luck with that. The politicians only seem to care when they want their vote, and most of them are filled on empty promises. But most importantly I would say that culture needs a big change of direction if they want a better future, and moving to a different neighborhood is not gonna change that unless you build that solid family foundation and change that culture.
Like I said, highest priority should be making those areas safe so the people living there can have a chance. The lack of family structure is something that the community needs to fix for itself if they want a brighter future. Sadly part of the problem is cultural too, a good example of that is hip hop music glorifying this lifestyle. To someone on the outside hip hop music is not really part of their life, it's just entertainment. But to a kid growing up in that environment I would imagine it plays a bigger role, especially to youth who grow up with no fathers or to drug addict parents.
If these communities continue waiting for outside help then good luck with that. The politicians only seem to care when they want their vote, and most of them are filled on empty promises. But most importantly I would say that culture needs a big change of direction if they want a better future, and moving to a different neighborhood is not gonna change that unless you build that solid family foundation and change that culture.
I agree with you on all of this, especially the part where you say that culture needs a big change of direction. Unfortunately, while those groups are segregated (and even being catered to), building a solid family foundation and changing the culture will be impossible. Not virtually impossible. Impossible. We've had 60 years to prove that. Did all those gazillions we spent on social programs over those years work? Well, the proof is in the pudding...
I view it almost like a monopoly. And what do we do when we have a monopoly? We break it up. A version of that needs to be done here. As I said way back in this thread, the Obama Administration was starting to recognize this and was doing a greater push to move voucher holders out into the suburbs. Obviously, that changed with the Trump Administration, but I've heard the Biden Administration's HUD is looking at this also. And certainly, our State's IHDA could also work on this without as much backlash as they might have taken in the past, given that Democrats are virtually in complete control of State politics now. So, in short, I guess we'll see.
Like I said, highest priority should be making those areas safe so the people living there can have a chance. The lack of family structure is something that the community needs to fix for itself if they want a brighter future. Sadly part of the problem is cultural too, a good example of that is hip hop music glorifying this lifestyle. To someone on the outside hip hop music is not really part of their life, it's just entertainment. But to a kid growing up in that environment I would imagine it plays a bigger role, especially to youth who grow up with no fathers or to drug addict parents.
If these communities continue waiting for outside help then good luck with that. The politicians only seem to care when they want their vote, and most of them are filled on empty promises. But most importantly I would say that culture needs a big change of direction if they want a better future, and moving to a different neighborhood is not gonna change that unless you build that solid family foundation and change that culture.
And this is why I am fervently pro choice. Although it doesn't help when poor people just keep having kids out of wedlock instead of getting an abortion.
The thread got quite lengthy! Anyway, to close out my point, which I think I've made clear, here are a few good reads regarding welcoming the poor to the affluent suburbs...
Trump turned on the idea in a miscalculated political ploy, which had been fostered by the Obama Administration and even by his own administration early on. I would think progressives would be embracing it for that reason alone! Apparently, he thought there were a bunch of Reagan Democrats in the suburbs who were going to buy this. Instead, modern suburbanites, especially in Chicagoland, are much more progressive, and many are embarrassed by their segregation. This isn't 1972. So his attacks were completely tone deaf, and probably contributed to his 7+ million vote drubbing.
So now is the chance to make it right. We really need this to gain some traction.
So if you feel that an area is not mixed racial, then go buy a home there.
I'd be more concerned about the cultural differences that money can bring. I've been to a church over there on the north shore. Nice people but i was dressed kinda casually. I sensed that the others were more financially better off than me. I thought it was weird that they had a Bible study in the COUNTRY CLUB!!! I've never heard of that.. wow. Bible study in the country club. Thats too high class for me. But the people were nice to me, just i did not fit in. So for that reason, I would look more than just skin color to feel comfortable with that crowd.
In my humble opinion, if you're all noticing and focusing on a person's color more than anything else, you're not focusing on their CHARACTER.
But maybe that's just ME!
What if a, say, Puerto Rican, didn't give me a chance because I'm part Mexican?
What if a, say, Serbian, didn't give me a chance because I'm part Croatian??
...
Wouldn't that be a shame for someone to focus on my look and ethnicity??
Maybe we all need to drop the racial thing and focus on other characteristics??
Again, maybe that's just ME!
PEACE!!
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.
